Library

Notes: Abstract The semaeostome scyphomedusa, Chrysaora quinquecirrha (Desor, 1848), is an abundant and important planktonic predator in estuaries and coastal waters of the eastern USA during the summer. We videotaped free-swimming medusae in the laboratory and in the field in order to determine the relationship between swimming motions and prey encounter with capture surfaces. Medusae were collected from the Choptank River (Chesapeake Bay) in September 1992 and in the Niantic River, Connecticut, USA in July 1994. We used newly hatched Artemia sp. nauplii and fluorescein dye to trace water motions around swimming medusae. Swimming results in a pulsed series of toroids which travel along the medusan oral arms and tentacles. Prey are entrained in this flow and the location of naupliar encounter was influenced by the phase of the pulsation cycle during which entrainment occurred. Flow-field velocities, measured by tracking particles adjacent to the bell margin during contraction, increased with bell diameter.

Notes: Abstract The mechanical basis of prey capture by scyphomedusae has been largely ignored, despite the importance of these predators in a variety of planktonic ecosystems. Interactions between swimming, fluid motions, and prey capture were examined during 1991–1992 for a species from the three scyphozoan orders having planktonic medusae: Rhizostomeae, Stomolophus meleagris Agassiz, 1862; Coronatae, Linuche unguiculata (Schwartz, 1788); and Semaeostomeae, Cyanea capillata (Linnaeus, 1758). All three species used flow created during bell pulsation to capture prey, but the type of flow used for prey capture and the capture surface morphology were different for each species. The mechanics of capture by these species of diverse morphology and taxonomic affinity suggests that the use of bell pulsation-induced flow for prey entrainment and capture is widespread among the scyphomedusae.

Notes: Abstract Although medusan predators play demonstrably important roles in a variety of marine ecosystems, the mechanics of prey capture and, hence, prey selection, have remained poorly defined. A review of the literature describing the commonly studied medusa Aurelia aurita (Linnaeus 1758) reveals no distinct patterns of prey selectivity and suggests that A. aurita is a generalist and feeds unselectively upon available zooplankton. We examined the mechanics of prey capture by A. aurita using video methods to record body and fluid motions. Medusae were collected between February and June in 1990 and 1991 from Woods Hole, Massachusetts and Narragansett Bay, Rhode Island, USA. Tentaculate A. aurita create fluid motions during swimming which entrain prey and bring them into contact with tentacles. We suggest that this mechanism dominates prey selection by A. aurita. In this case, we predict that medusae of a specific diameter will positively select prey with escape speeds slower than the flow velocities at their bell margins. Negatively selected prey escape faster than the medusan flow velocity draws them to capture surfaces. Faster prey will be captured by larger medusac because flow field velocity is a function of bell diameter. On the basis of prey escape velocities and flow field velocities of A. aurita with diameters of 0.8 to 7.1 cm, we predict that A. aurita will select zooplankton such as barnacle nauplii and some slow swimming hydromedusae, while faster copepods will be negatively selected.

Notes: Abstract In situ feeding patterns of ephyrae of the jellyfish Aurelia aurita (Linnaeus) revealed the importance of relatively large (〉1 mm) prey in the diet of these scyphozoan predators. These studies were carried out in Narragansett Bay, Rhode Island, USA in March and April, from 1993 through 1996. Rotifers were the only small prey ingested in quantity, and then only when they were unusually abundant in the plankton. Copepod nauplii, similar in size to rotifers and equally abundant, were rarely consumed. Since copepods evince rapid escape responses, this observation suggested a role for prey escape in determining prey vulnerability, while the predominance of large prey in the diet suggested a role for prey size. Using two dimensional video observations of free-swimming ephyrae and their prey in the laboratory we tested hypotheses about the mechanisms underlying these dietary patterns, comparing mechanisms for capture of large versus small prey and for prey of equal size but differing escape behaviors. Capture efficiencies of ephyrae feeding on large prey were 4 to 12 times greater than for small prey taxa. Capture efficiencies for prey of equal size also differed significantly, indicating that other factors influence the outcome of predator–prey interactions. Most prey captures occurred while the ephyrae were swimming and creating fluid flows that entrained prey into the subumbrellar region. Even copepod nauplii were frequently drawn into the subumbrella of swimming ephyrae despite average potential escape velocities (25.7 mm s−1) that exceeded mean maximum velocity of fluid flows around the ephyrae (13.1 mm s−1). Large prey were more likely than small prey to contact nematocyst-bearing surfaces both before and after entrainment in flow fields. With regard to behavior, prey escape speeds were not the only predictor of prey vulnerability. Prey that continued swimming after entrainment (rotifers and brine shrimp) were captured more often than prey of equal size that ceased normal swimming (copepod nauplii and barnacle nauplii). Copepod nauplii were the prey least likely to be captured because they either “played dead” and were expelled from the subumbrella of the ephyrae before contacting a surface, or they eventually escaped at high velocity. These observations indicate that size-selective predation by ephyrae of A. aurita can be influenced by a variety of behavioral responses of the prey.