Regeneration of lost siphon tissues in the tellinacean bivalve Nuttallia olivacea

Takeshi Tomiyama, Kinuko Ito

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

14 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

The inhalant siphon of the tellinacean bivalve Nuttallia olivacea is an important prey item for juvenile stone flounder Platichthys bicoloratus in estuaries in Japan. We examined quantitative siphon regeneration of N. olivacea in rearing experiments of siphon-removed bivalves (> 30 mm shell length) both in the laboratory and in their natural habitat. Under laboratory conditions, siphon-removed bivalves regenerated lost tissues quantitatively at 15 and 25 °C 1 mo after siphon removal, although regeneration was incomplete. A 3-mo caging experiment in the field showed that great regeneration occurred in siphon-removed bivalves. However, the siphon weight of removed bivalves was significantly smaller than that of non-amputated bivalves, suggesting the incomplete regeneration. In a 1-mo caging experiment, bivalves that had approximately 15% of their siphons amputated were selected at some intervals to illustrate the quantitative regeneration process. Estimated daily siphon production was remarkably high only a few days after amputation. It decreased greatly thereafter, but regeneration was not completed within 30 d. These results indicate that bivalves regenerate siphons rapidly just after losing siphon tissues and then regeneration is slowed down before it is completed.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)104-113
Number of pages10
JournalJournal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology
Volume335
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2006 Jul 25

Keywords

  • Caging experiment
  • Nuttallia olivacea
  • Quantitative regeneration
  • Tellinacean bivalve

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics
  • Aquatic Science

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Regeneration of lost siphon tissues in the tellinacean bivalve Nuttallia olivacea'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this