Just a matter of size? Evaluating allometry and intersexual heterometry in Pagurus bernhardus using ratios and indices (Decapoda, Anomura)

Abstract

Heterochely denotes the presence of dissimilarly sized chelipeds on opposite sides of the body, a prevalent occurrence in diverse crustaceans. Conversely, heterometry pertains to the quantifiable disparities in size between these chelipeds. Both chelipeds hold pivotal roles in activities such as foraging, mating, and defense. Consequently, individuals of both genders in heterochelic species exhibit this morphological pattern. Previous studies have identified sexual dimorphism in cheliped size, with males displaying larger major chelipeds compared to females, albeit solely relying on propodus length as a size proxy and focusing solely on the major cheliped. In our study, we meticulously examined 190 specimens of the common European hermit crab Pagurus bernhardus from two collections. We sought to elucidate allometric relationships and assess whether heterometry exhibited sex-based differences when adjusting for body size by using ratios. Our findings revealed that male chelipeds displayed hyperallometric growth relative to females, and all three calculated heterometry indices exhibited significant disparities between the sexes. Consequently, male specimens exhibited larger major and minor chelipeds, even when theoretically matched for body size with females. This phenomenon may be attributed, among other factors, to male–male contests. Should indirect mate selection favor males with larger chelipeds in proportion to their body size, this dynamic could potentiate sexual selection in their favor.

Keywords

allometric growth / body-size correction / chelipeds / hermit crabs / heterochely / natural selection / sexual selection

References

[1] Abby-KalioNJ,WarnerGF (1989). Heterochely and handedness in the shore crab Carcinus maenas (L.) (Crustacea: Brachyura). Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society 96,19–26.

[2] AkbayL,AkbayT, ErolO,Kilinç M (2019). Inadvertent use of ANOVA in educational research: ANOVA is not a surrogate for MANOVA. Journal of Measurement and Evaluation in Education and Psychology 10,302–314.

[3] AlbrechtGH,GelvinBR, HartmannSE (1993). Ratios as a size adjustment in morphometrics. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 91,441–468.

[4] AllenB,Levinton JS (2007). Costs of bearing a sexually selected ornamental weapon in a fiddler crab. Functional Ecology 21,154–161.

[5] AnderssonM (1994). Sexual Selection. Princeton University Press,Princeton, NJ.

[6] AtchleyWR,GaskinsCT, AndersonD (1976). Statistical properties of ratios. I. Empirical results. Systematic Biology 25,137–148.

[7] BakerRH,Wilkinson GS (2001). Phylogenetic analysis of sexual dimorphism and eye-span allometry in stalk-eyed flies (Diopsidae). Evolution 55,1373–1385.

[8] BaurH,Leuenberger C (2011). Analysis of ratios in multivariate morphometry. Systematic Biology 60,813–825.

[9] BertiniG,Fransozo A (1999). Relative growth of Petrochirus diogenes (Linnaeus, 1758) (Crustacea, Anomura, Diogenidae) in the Ubatuba region, São Paulo, Brazil. Revista Brasileira de Biologia 59,617–625.

[10] BertnessMD (1981). The influence of shell-type on hermit crab growth rate and clutch size. Crustaceana 40,197–205.

[11] BiagiR,Mantelatto FLM (2006). Relative growth and sexual maturity of the hermit crab Paguristes erythrops (Anomura, Diogenidae) from South Atlantic. Hydrobiologia 559,247–254.

[12] BondurianskyR (2007). Sexual selection and allometry: A critical reappraisal of the evidence and ideas. Evolution 61,838–849.

[13] BurkhardtD,de la Motte I (1987). Physiological, behavioural, and morphometric data elucidate the evolutive significance of stalked eyes in Diopsidae (Diptera). Entomologia Generalis 12,221–233.

[14] BurnabyTP (1966). Growth-invariant discriminant functions and generalized distances. Biometrics 22,96–107.

[15] CarayonJ (1941). Morphologie et étude des gamétes et de la fécondation chez les Crustacés Décapodes. Bulletin de la Société Zoologique de France 12,181–279.

[16] CheverudJM (1982). Relationships among ontogenetic, static, and evolutionary allometry. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 59,139–149.

[17] Contreras-GarduñoJ,Córdoba-AguilarA (2006). Sexual selection in hermit crabs: A review and outlines of future research. Journal of Zoology 270,595–605.

[18] DarwinC (1871). The Descent of Man and Selection in Relation to Sex. John Murray,London.

[19] DoakeS,Scantlebury M,ElwoodRW (2010). The costs of bearing arms and armour in the hermit crab Pagurus bernhardus. Animal Behavior 80,637–642.

[20] DowdsBM,ElwoodRW (1983). Shell wars: Assessment strategies and the timing of decisions in hermit crab shell fights. Behaviour 85,1–24.

[21] ElwoodRW,AdamsPM (1990). How hermit crabs Pagurus bernhardus L. deal with obstructions in the apertures of shells. The Irish Naturalists’ Journal 23,180–185.

[22] ElwoodRW,GlassC (1981). Negotiation or aggression during shell fights of the hermit crab Pagurus bernhardus? Animal Behaviour 29,1239–1244.

[23] ElwoodRW,KennedyH (1988). Sex differences in shell preferences of the hermit crab Pagurus bernhardus L. The Irish Naturalists’ Journal 22,436–440.

[24] ElwoodRW,StewartA (1985). The timing of decisions during shell investigation by the hermit crab,Pagurus bernhardus. Animal Behaviour 33,620–627.

[25] FairbairnDJ,Blanckenhorn WU,SzekelyT (2007). Sex, Size & Gender Roles. Evolutionary Studies of Sexual Size Dimorphism. Oxford University Press,Oxford, U.K.

[26] FieldA (2018). Discovering Statistics Using IBM SPSS Statistics,5th edn. Sage Publications Ltd,Thousand Oaks, CA.

[27] FryxellDC,WeilerDE, KinnisonMT,Palkovacs EP (2019). Eco-evolutionary dynamics of sexual dimorphism. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 34,591–594.

[28] GoshimaS,Kawashima T,WadaS (1998). Mate choice by males of the hermit crabs Pagurus filholi: Do males assess ripeness and/or fecundity of females? Ecological Research 13,151–161.

[29] GouldSJ (1966). Allometry and size in ontogeny and phylogeny. Biological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society 41,587–638.

[30] GouldSJ (1977). Ontogeny and Phylogeny. Harvard University Press,Cambridge, MA.

[31] HamasakiK,DanS (2021). Seasonal changes in the sexual size dimorphisms of the chelipeds and pleons of the porcellanid crab Petrolisthes japonicus. Zoological Studies 60,18.

[32] HamasakiK,DanS (2022). Heterochely and cheliped dimorphism in the porcellanid crab Petrolisthes japonicus (De Haan, 1849) (Decapoda: Porcellanidae). Nauplius 30,e2022034.

[33] HammerO,HarperDAT, RyanPD (2001). PAST: Paleontological statistics software package for education and data analysis. Palaeontologia Electronica 4,4.

[34] HartnollRG (1974). Variation in growth pattern between some secondary sexual characters in crabs (Decapoda, Brachyura). Crustaceana 27,131–136.

[35] HartnollRG (1982). Growth. In: Bliss DE, ed. The Biology of Crustacea: Embryology, Morphology and Genetics, Vol. 2. Academic Press,New York, pp. 111–196.

[36] HazlettBA (1968). Communicatory effect of body position in Pagurus bernhardus (L.) (Decapoda, Anomura). Crustaceana 14,210–214.

[37] HazlettBA (1969). Further investigations of the Cheliped presentation display in Pagurus bernhardus (Decapoda, Anomura). Crustaceana 17,31–34.

[38] HillsM (1978). On ratios—A response to Atchley, Gaskins, and Anderson. Systematic Zoology 27,61–62.

[39] HuntJ,BreukerCJ, SadowskiJA,Moore AJ (2009). Male–male competition, female mate choice and their interaction: Determining total sexual selection. Journal of Evolutionary Biology 22,13–26.

[40] HuxleyJH (1924). Constant differential growth-ratios and their significance. Nature 114,895–896.

[41] HuxleyJH (1932). Problems of Relative Growth. Methuen,London.

[42] IsmailT (2021). A geometric-morphometric analysis of the heterochely in the red sea hermit crab “Clibanarius signatus” and its developmental stability and modularity. Egyptian Journal of Zoology 76,30–51.

[43] JASP Team (2023). JASP (Computer software), Version 0.17.3. Available from URL: https://jasp-stats.org/previous-versions/

[44] JormalainenV (1998). Precopulatory mate guarding in crustaceans: Male competitive strategy and intersexual conflict. The Quarterly Review of Biology 73,275–304.

[45] KiefferKM,ReeseRJ, ThompsonB (2001). Statistical techniques employed in AERJ and JCP articles from 1988 to 1997: A methodological review. Journal of Experimental Education 69,280–309.

[46] KlingenbergCP (1996). Multivariate allometry. In: Marcus LF,Corti M,Loy A,Naylor GJP,Slice DE, eds. Advances in Morphometrics. Plenum Press,New York, pp. 23–49.

[47] KlingenbergCP,Zimmermann M (1992). Static, ontogenetic, and evolutionary allometry: A multivariate comparison in nine species of water striders. The American Naturalist 140,601–620.

[48] LaidreME,ElwoodRW (2008). Motivation matters: Cheliped extension displays in the hermit crab,Pagurus bernhardus, are honest signals of hunger. Animal Behaviour 75,2041–2047.

[49] LaneSM,BriffaM (2017). The price of attack: Rethinking damage costs in animal contests. Animal Behaviour 126,23–29.

[50] LaneSM,BriffaM (2020). The role of spatial accuracy and precision in hermit crab contests. Animal Behaviour 167,111–118.

[51] LaneSM,Cornwell TO,BriffaM (2022). The angle of attack: Rapping technique predicts skill in hermit crab contests. Animal Behaviour 187,55–61.

[52] LevintonJS (2020). Thermal stress: the role of body size and the giant major claw in survival and heat transfer of a fiddler crab (Leptuca pugilator). Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 530,151428.

[53] LevintonJS,JudgeML, KurdzielJP (1995). Functional differences between the major and minor claws of fiddler crabs (Uca, family Ocypodidae, Order Decapoda, Subphylum Crustacea): A result of selection or developmental constraint. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 193,147–160.

[54] MariappanP,Balasundaram C,SchmitzB (2000). Decapod crustacean chelipeds: An overview. Journal of Biosciences 25,301–313.

[55] MatsuoK,Tanikawa D,YasudaC,WadaS (2014). Sex-related differences in size, function and regeneration of the major cheliped in the hermit crab Pagurus filholi. Marine Ecology 36,1391–1399.

[56] McCoyMW,BolkerBM, OchsenbergCW,MinerBG,VoneshJR (2006). Size correction: Comparing morphological traits among populations and environments. Oecologia 148,547–554.

[57] McCulloughEL,MillerCW, EmlenDJ (2016). Why sexually selected ornaments are not weapons. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 31,742–751.

[58] McCulloughEL,O’Brien DM (2022). Variation in allometry along the weapon signal continuum. Evolutionary Ecology 36,591–604.

[59] MitchellKA (1976). Shell selection in the hermit crab Pagurus bernhardus. Marine Biology 35,335–343.

[60] MowlesSL,BriffaM (2012). Forewarned is forearmed: Early signals of RHP predict opponent fatigue in hermit crab shell fights. Behavioral Ecology 23,1324–1329.

[61] NeilS,ElwoodRW (1986). Factors Influencing shell investigation in the hermit crab,Pagurus bernhardus. Ethology 73,225–234.

[62] O’BrienDM,AllenCE, Van KleeckMJ et al. (2018). On the evolution of extreme structures: Static scaling and the function of sexually selected signals. Animal Behaviour 144,95–108.

[63] OkamuraS,GoshimaS (2010). Indirect female choice mediated by sex pheromones in the hermit crab Pagurus filholi. Journal of Ethology 28,323–329.

[64] RamsayK,KaiserM, HughesR (1997). A field study of intraspecific competition for food in hermit crabs (Pagurus bernhardus). Estuarine Coastal and Shelf Science 44,213–220.

[65] RodríguezRL,Eberhard WG (2019). Why the static allometry of sexually-selected traits is so variable: The importance of function. Integrative & Comparative Biology 59,1290–1302.

[66] SchmidtM,LiuY, HouXG et al. (2021). Intraspecific variation in the Cambrian: New observations on the morphology of the Chengjiang euarthropod Sinoburius lunaris. BMC Ecology and Evolution 21,127.

[67] ShineR (1984). Ecological causes for the evolution of sexual size dimorphism: A review of the evidence. Quarterly Review of Biology 64,419–461.

[68] ShingletonAW,Frankino WA (2013). New perspectives on the evolution of exaggerated traits. BioEssays 35,100–107.

[69] ShingletonAW,Frankino WA,FlattT,NijhoutHF,EmlenDJ (2007). Size and shape: The developmental regulation of static allometry in insects. BioEssays 29,536–548.

[70] ShukerDM (2014). Sexual selection theory. In: Shuker DM,Simmons LW, eds. The Evolution of Insect Mating Systems. Oxford University Press,Oxford, pp. 20–41.

[71] SimmonsLW,TomkinsJL (1996). Sexual selection and the allometry of earwig forceps. Evolutionary Ecology 10,97–104.

[72] SlatkinM (1984). Ecological causes of sexual dimorphism. Evolution 38,622–630.

[73] SpaniF,ScaliciM, CrandallK,Piras P (2019). Claw asymmetry in crabs: Approaching an old issue from a new point of view. The Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 129,162–176.

[74] StevensJP (2002). Applied Multivariate Statistics for the Social Sciences. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates,Mahwah, NJ.

[75] TakedaS,MuraiM (1993). Asymmetry in male fiddler crabs is related to the basic pattern of claw-waving display. Biological Bulletin 184,203–208.

[76] ThompsonDW (1942). On Growth and Form. Cambridge University Press,Cambridge, UK.

[77] TrevisanA,SantosS (2012). Morphological sexual maturity, sexual dimorphism and heterochely in Aegla manuinflata (Anomura). Journal of Crustacean Biology 32,519–527.

[78] Van ValenL (1962). Study of fluctuating asymmetry. Evolution 16,125–142.

[79] WadaS,OhmoriH, GoshimaS,Nakao S (1997). Shell-size preference of hermit crabs depends on their growth rate. Animal Behaviour 54,1–8.

[80] WagnerP,HaugJT, HaugC (2019). A new calmanostracan crustacean species from the Cretaceous Yixian formation and a simple approach for differentiating fossil tadpole shrimps and their relatives. Zoological Letters 5,20.

[81] WarneRT (2014). A primer on multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) for behavioral scientists. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation 19,1–10.

[82] WileyRH,PostonJ (1996). Indirect mate choice, competition for mates, and coevolution of the sexes. Evolution 50,1371–1381.

[83] YasudaC,KogaT (2016). Importance of weapon size in all stages of male–male contests in the hermit crab Pagurus minutus. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 70,2175–2183.

[84] YasudaC,OtodaM, NakanoR,Takiya Y,KogaT (2017). Seasonal change in sexual size dimorphism of the major cheliped in the hermit crab Pagurus minutus. Ecological Research 32,347–357.

[85] YasudaC,SuzukiY, WadaS (2011). Function of the major cheliped in male–male competition in the hermit crab Pagurus nigrofascia. Marine Biology 158,2327–2334.

[86] YasudaC,Takeshita F,WadaS (2012). Assessment strategy in male-male contests of the hermit crab Pagurus middendorffii. Animal Behavior 84,385–390.

[87] YoshinoK,GoshimaS (2002). Sexual dominance in hermit crab shell fights: Asymmetries in owner-intruder status, crab size, and resource value between sexes. Journal of Ethology 20,63–69.

[88] ZientekLR,Thompson B (2009). Matrix summaries improve research reports: Secondary analyses using published literature. Educational Researcher 38,343–352.

RIGHTS & PERMISSIONS

2023 The Authors. Integrative Zoology published by International Society of Zoological Sciences, Institute of Zoology/Chinese Academy of Sciences and John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd.