Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-s2hrs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-20T05:10:20.266Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Influence of Photoperiodicity on Hatching of Sepia Officinalis

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 May 2009

W. P. Paulij ,
P. M. J. Herman ,
M. E. F. Roozen  and
J. M. Denuce
W. P. Paulij
Affiliation:
Zoology Department I, Catholic University, Toernooiveld, 6525 ED Nijmegen, The Netherlands
P. M. J. Herman
Affiliation:
Delta Institute for Hydrobiological Research, Vierstraat 28,4401 EA Yerseke, The Netherlands
M. E. F. Roozen
Affiliation:
Zoology Department I, Catholic University, Toernooiveld, 6525 ED Nijmegen, The Netherlands
J. M. Denuce
Affiliation:
Zoology Department I, Catholic University, Toernooiveld, 6525 ED Nijmegen, The Netherlands
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The influence of photoperiodicity on hatching of Sepia officinalis was investigated under different experimental light-dark (LD) conditions. The results are viewed in relation to some relevant properties of the perivitelline fluid (PVF) and the egg capsule during embryonic development. In embryos of S. officinalis the transition from light to dark ap-pears to act as a 'Zeitgeber' or synchronizer. The embryos consistently hatched during periods of darkness, even when the duration of the dark period was short (1–4 h) and replaced part of the natural light period. The hatching rhythm was independent of the embryonic stage at which the experimentwas started. Embryos that developed under a given LD rhythm did not hatch at that rhythm if it was changed or eliminated. In the absence of an external LD rhythm the time to hatching increased. Lack of pigmentation in the egg envelope appeared to reduce the time to hatching. If embryos were exposed to a single dark period of 1–4 h significantly more hatched during darkness while a dark-pulse of ten minutes resulted in no hatching. At the end of embryonic development the egg capsule of S. officinalis becomes thinner due to the expanding PVF. Absence ofthe envelope did not affect embryonic development but dramatically increased mortality and prema hire hatching (96%). Spectrophotometrical investigations indicated that light between 200 and 900 nm is absorbed similarly by the envelope and by female ink. The function of pigmentation in the envelopes remains obscure.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom , Volume 71 , Issue 3 , August 1991 , pp. 665 - 678
Copyright
Copyright © Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom 1991

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

Boletzky, S. Von, 1983. Sepia officinalis. In Cephalopod Life Cycles, vol. 1 (ed. Boyle, P.R.), pp. 31–52. London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
De Leersnyder, M. & Lemaire, J., 1972. Sur la composition minerale du liquide periembryonnaire de l'oeuf de Sepia officinalis L. Cahiers de Biologie Marine, 13, 429–431.Google Scholar
Fioroni, P., 1978. Cephalopoda. In Morphogenese der Here, pt. 2 (G5-I) (ed. Seidel, F.). Stuttgart-New York: G. Fischer Verlag.Google Scholar
Gurr, E., 1962. Staining Animal Tissues, Practical and Theoretical. London: Leonard Hill.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jecklin, L., 1934. Beitrag zur Kenntnis der Laichgallerten und der Biologie der Embryonen decapoder Cephalopoden. Revue Suisse de Zoologie, 41, 593–673.Google Scholar
Lemaire, J., 1970. Table de developpement embryonnaire de Sepia officinalis L. (Mollusque Cephalopode). Bulletin dela Societe Zoologique de France, 95, 773–782.Google Scholar
Mangold-Wirz, K., 1963. Biologie des cephalopodes benthiques et nectoniques de la Mer Catalane. Vie et Milieu, supplement no. 13, 1–285.Google Scholar
Mangold, K., 1987. Reproduction. In Cephalopod Life Cycles, vol II (ed. Boyle, P.R.), pp. 157–200. London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
McGill, R., Tukey, J.W. & Larsen, W.A., 1978. Variations of box plots. The American Statistician, 32, 12–16.Google Scholar
Naef, A., 1928. Die Cephalopoden. Fauna und Flora des Golfes von Neapel, 35, 357pp.Google Scholar
Orelli, M. Von, 1959. Uber das schliipfen von Octopus vulgaris, Sepia officinalis, und Loligo vulgaris. Revue Suisse de Zoologie, 66, 330–343.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paulij, W.P., Herman, P.M.J., Van Hannen, E.J. & Denuce, J.M., 1990a. The impact of photoperiodicity on hatching of Loligo vulgaris and Loligo forbesi. Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom, 70, 597–610.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paulij, W.P., Bogaards, R.H. & Denuce, J.M., 1990b. Influence of salinity on embryonic development and the distribution of Sepia officinalis in the Delta Area (south western part of The Netherlands). Marine Biology, 107, 17–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paulij, W.P., Zurburg, W., Denuce, J.M. & Van Hannen, E.J., 1990c. The effect of copper on the embryonic development and hatching of Sepia officinalis L. Archives of Environmental Contami-nation and Toxicology, 19, 797–801.Google Scholar
Poole, H.H. & Atkins, W.R.G., 1937. The penetration into sea of light of various wave-lengths as measured by emission or rectifier photo-electric cells. Proceedings of the Royal Society (B), 123, 151–165.Google Scholar
Sokal, R.R. & Rohlf, F.J., 1981. Biometry, 2nd ed. New York: W.H. Freeman & Co.Google Scholar
Steinberg, D. 1985. Logit, a supplementary module for SYSTAT. Evanston, Illinois: SYSTAT, Inc. Wilkinson, L. 1988.SYSTAT: the system for statistics. Evanston, Illinois: SYSTAT, Inc.Google Scholar
Worms, J., 1983. Loligo vulgaris. In Cephalopod Life Cycles, vol. 1 (ed. Boyle, P.R.), pp. 143–159. London: Academic Press.Google Scholar