Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jkksz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-22T18:03:28.989Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Adaptations of tapeta in the eyes of mesopelagic decapod shrimps to match the oceanic irradiance distribution

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 May 2009

P. M. J. Shelton ,
E. Gaten  and
P. J. Herring
P. M. J. Shelton
Affiliation:
Department of Zoology, University of Leicester, University Road, Leicester, LEI 7RH
E. Gaten
Affiliation:
Department of Zoology, University of Leicester, University Road, Leicester, LEI 7RH
P. J. Herring
Affiliation:
Institute of Oceanographic Sciences Deacon Laboratory, Wormley, Godalming, Surrey, GU8 5UB
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Eyeshine brightness was measured in a number of species of oplophorid shrimps and one sergestid. Eyeshine varies in a systematic way across the eye. Forward and downward looking parts of the eye often have the brightest eyeshine. In many cases eyeshine is graded in the horizontal and vertical axes. Eyeshine brightness can be explained in terms of underlying tapetal morphology. These features of the decapod eye can be rationalised in terms of the normal irradiance distribution in the sea and the need for certain parts of the eye to have enhanced sensitivity. Contrary to the expected results, when six species of oplophorid were compared there was a clear trend of decreasing brightness with depth at whichthey occurred. In a number of species the tapetum is incomplete with distinct holes. Such holes occur in the dorsal region of two species of oplophorid. In one deep-water species the central tapetum is lacking. This feature, and the observed decrease in eyeshine with depth, may be adaptations to reduce the signal that eyeshine provides to potential predators.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom , Volume 72 , Issue 1 , February 1992 , pp. 77 - 88
Copyright
Copyright © Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom 1992

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

Denton, E.J., 1970. On the organization of reflecting surfaces in some marine animals. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London (B), 258, 285–313.Google ScholarPubMed
Denton, E.J., 1990. Light and vision at depths greater than 200 metres. In Light and life in the sea (ed Herring, P.J. et al.), pp. 127–148. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Domanski, P.A., 1986. The Azores front: a zoogeographic boundary In Pelagic biogeogmphy (ed Pierrot-Bults, A.C., et al.), pp. 73–83. The Netherlands: Unesco. [Unesco Technical Papers in Marine Science, no. 49.]Google Scholar
Foxton, P., 1970. The vertical distribution of pelagic decapods (Crustacea: Natantia) collected on the Sond cruise 1965.1. The Caridea. Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom, 50, 939–960.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gaten, E., Shelton, P.M.J., Chapman, C.J. & Shanks, A.M., 1990. Depth related variation in the structure and functioning of the compound eye of the Norway lobster Nephrops norvegicus. Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom, 70, 343–355.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gaten, E., Shelton, P.M.J. & Herring, P.J., 1992. Regional morphological variations in the compound eyes of certain mesopelagic shrimps in relation to their habitat. Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom, 72, 61–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Herring, P.J., 1976. Bioluminescence in decapod Crustacea. Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom, 56, 1029–1047.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hiller-Adams, P. & Case, J.F., 1988. Eye size of pelagic crustaceans as a function of habitat depth and possession of photophores. Vision Research, 28, 667–680.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jerlov, N.G., 1976. Marine Optics. Amsterdam: Elsevier Scientific Publishing Co.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
Kirk, J.T.O., 1983. Light and photosynthesis in aquatic ecosystems, Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Kunze, P., 1979. Apposition and superposition eyes. In Handbook of sensory physiology, vol. VII/6A (ed. Autrum, H.), pp. 441–502. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
Land, M.F., 1976. Superposition images are formed by reflection in the eyes of some oceanic decapod Crustacea. Nature, London, 263, 764–765.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Land, M.F., 1981a. Optics and vision in invertebrates. In Handbook of sensory physiology, vol. VII/6B (ed. Autrum, H.), pp. 471–492. Berlin: Springer Verlag.Google Scholar
Land, M.F., 1981b. Optics of the eyes of Phronima and other deep-sea amphipods. Journal of Comparative Physiology, 145A, 209–226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Land, M.F., 1989a. The eyes of hyperiid amphipods: relations of optical structure to depth. Journal of Comparative Physiology, 164A, 751–762.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Land, M.F., 1989b. Variations in the structure and design of compound eyes. In Facets of vision (ed. Stavenga, D.G. and Hardie, R.C.), pp. 90–111. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Land, M.F., Burton, F.A. & Meyer-Rochow, V.B., 1979. The optical geometry of euphausiid eyes. Journal of Comparative Physiology, 130A, 49–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Loew, E.R., 1976. Light and photoreceptor degeneration in the Norway Lobster, Nephrops norvegicus (L.). Proceedings of the Royal Society of London (B), 193, 31–44.Google ScholarPubMed
Nicol, J.A.C., 1960. Spectral composition of the light of the lantern-fish, Myctophum punctatum. Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom, 39, 27–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nilsson, D.-E., 1989. Optics and evolution of the compound eye. In Facets of vision (ed. Stavenga, D.G. and Hardie, R.C.), pp. 30–73. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roe, H.S.J. & Shale, D.M., 1979. A new multiple rectangular midwater trawl (RMT1+8M) and some modifications to the Institute of Oceanographic Sciences’ RMT 1 +8. Marine Biology, 50, 283–288.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shelton, P.M.J., Gaten, E. & Chapman, C.J., 1985. Light and retinal damage in Nephrops norvegicus (L.) (Crustacea). Proceedings of the Royal Society of London (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
Shelton, P.M.J., Gaten, E. & Herring, P.J., 1989. Compound eye morphology, pigment migration and light-induced retinula damage in mesopelagic decapod crustaceans. Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom, 69, 737.Google Scholar
Walls, G.L., 1942. The Vertebrate Eye. New York: Hafner Publishing Co.Google Scholar
Welsh, J.H. & Chace, F.A. Jr, 1937. Eyes of deep sea crustaceans. I. Acanthephyridae. Biological Bulletin. Marine Biological Laboratory, Woods Hole, 72, 57–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Welsh, J.H. & Chace, F.A. Jr, 1938. Eyes of deep-sea crustaceans. II. Sergestidae. Biological Bulletin. Marine Biological Laboratory, Woods Hole, 74, 364–375.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wild, R. A., Darlington, E. & Herring, P.J., 1985. An acoustically controlled cod-end system for the recovery of deep-sea animals at in situ temperatures. Deep-Sea Research, 32, 1583–1589.CrossRefGoogle Scholar