Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-8ctnn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-31T15:40:53.717Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The opening response of mussels (Mytilus edulis) exposed to rising sea-water concentrations

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 May 2009

John Davenport
John Davenport
Affiliation:
N.E.R.C. Unit of Marine Invertebrate Biology, Marine Science Laboratories, Menai Bridge, Gwynedd
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

When exposed to water of low salinity specimens of Mytilus edulis L. keep their shell valves tightly closed; they do not gape periodically to test the external medium. Exchange of salts and water between the mantle cavity and the environment is thus minimized. Rising salinities are registered by diffusion of salts to the tentaculate portion of the inhalent siphon and not to any other portion of the mantle edge or to any more deeply located structures.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom , Volume 61 , Issue 3 , August 1981 , pp. 667 - 678
Copyright
Copyright © Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom 1981

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

Abbott, C. H., 1939. Shore isopods; niches occupied, and degrees of transition towards land life, with special reference to the family Ligydidae. Proceedings of the 7th Pacific Scientific Congress, 3, 505–511.Google Scholar
Ayres, P. A. & Wood, P. C, 1977. The live storage of lobsters. Laboratory Leaflets. Fisheries Laboratory, Lowestoft, no. 37, 9 pp.Google Scholar
Barnes, H. & Barnes, M., 1958. Note on the opening response of Balanus balanoides (L.) in relation to salinity and certain inorganic ions. Verbffentlichungen des Instituts fur Meeresforschung in Bremerhaven, 5, 160–164.Google Scholar
Barnes, T. C, 1939. Experiments on Ligia in Bermuda. VI. Reactions to common cations. Biological Bulletin. Marine Biological Laboratory, Woods Hole, Mass., 76, 121–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barnes, T. C, 1940. Experiments on Ligia in Bermuda. VII. Further effects of sodium, ammonium and magnesium. Biological Bulletin. Marine Biological Laboratory, Woods Hole, Mass., 78, 35–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bettison, J. C. & Davenport, J., 1976. Salinity preference in gammarid amphipods with special reference to Marinogammarus marinus (Leach). Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom, 56, 135–142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cawthorne, D. F., 1979. Some Effects of Fluctuating Temperature and Salinity upon Cirripedes. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Wales.Google Scholar
Comely, C. A., 1978. Modiolus modiolus (L.) from the Scottish West Coast. 1. Biology. Ophelia, 17, 167–193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davenport, J., 1972. Salinity tolerance and preference in the porcelain crabs, Porcellana platycheles and Porcellana longicornis. Marine Behaviour and Physiology, 1, 123–138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davenport, J., 1979. The isolation response of mussels {Mytilus edulis L.) exposed to falling sea-water concentrations. Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom, 59, 123–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davenport, J., Gruffydd, Ll. D. & Beaumont, A. R., 1975. An apparatus to supply water of fluctuating salinity and its use in a study of the salinity tolerances of larvae of the scallop Pecten maximus (L.). Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom, 55, 391–409.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gross, W. J., 1957. A behavioural mechanism for osmotic regulation in a semi terrestrial crab. Biological Bulletin. Marine Biological Laboratory, Woods Hole, Mass., 115, 114–125.Google Scholar
Jansson, B. O., 1962. Salinity resistance and salinity preference of two oligochaetes Aklerdrilus monospermatecus Knoller and Marionina preclittochaeta n.sp. from the intertidal fauna of marine sandy beaches. Oikos, 13, 293–305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kinne, O., 1971. Salinity: animals; invertebrates. In Marine Ecology, vol. 1, part 2 (ed. O., Kinne), pp. 821–995. Wiley-Interscience.Google Scholar
Krogh, A., 1939. Osmotic Regulation in Aquatic Animals. 242 pp. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Lagerspetz, K. & Mattila, M., 1961. Salinity reactions of some freshwater and brackish water crustaceans. Biological Bulletin, Marine Biological Laboratory, Woods Hole, Mass., 120, 44–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mclusky, D. S., 1970. Salinity preference in Corophium volutator. Journal of the Marine Bio-logical Association of the United Kingdom, 50, 747–752.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Milne, A., 1940. Some ecological aspects of the intertidal area of the estuary of the Aberdeenshire Dee. Transactions of the Royal Society of Edinburgh, 60, 107–139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shumway, S. E., 1977. The effects of fluctuating salinity on the osmotic pressure and Na+, Ca2+, and Mg2+ concentrations in the haemolymph of bivalves. Marine Biology, 41, 153–177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shumway, S. E. & Davenport, J., 1977. Some aspects of the physiology of Arenicola marina (Polychaeta) exposed to fluctuating salinities. Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom, 57, 907–924.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vincent, M., 1973. Preferendum ionique chez des Amphipodes epiges du Centre-Ouest. Vie et milieu, 23, 65–81.Google Scholar