Fatty acid composition as a dietary indicator of the invasive caprellid, Caprella mutica (Crustacea: Amphipoda)

The invasive caprellid amphipod Caprella mutica is one of the most widely dispersed marine non-native species globally. Originating in sub-boreal north-east Asia, it has now been found in both the northern and the southern hemispheres. One potential reason why this species is such a successful invader is its ability to utilise a wide variety of food sources. The contribution of different food sources to the diet of C. mutica was estimated using fatty acids as biomarkers. Caprella mutica was collected from three field sites, including sea cages stocked with Atlantic salmon Salmo salar, shellfish longlines stocked with the blue mussel Mytilus edulis and mooring lines marking the Loch Linnhe Artificial Reef (>2 km from caged finfish aquaculture), where established populations of this species are known to occur. In addition, the fatty acid compositions of C. mutica held in aquaria and either fed the microalga, Dunaliella tertiolecta, or the diatom, Phaeodactylum tricornutum, for a period of 21 days were investigated. The fatty acid composition of the diatom and the microalgal diets was also examined. The results showed that C. mutica contained high levels of polyunsaturated fatty acids, particularly 20:5(n-3); other dominant fatty acids included 18:1(n-9), 22:6(n-3) and 16:0 (in decreasing order based on abundance). Significant differences in the fatty acid profiles between caprellids fed on the microalgae and the diatom diets and between C. mutica collected from the field sites were observed. These results provide evidence that lipid biomarkers can be successfully used to provide evidence of feeding strategy for C. mutica and that the flexibility observed in this strategy may play an important role in its invasion success.     

Public intervention in rural housing markets

This paper is a revised version of one presented to the Regional Science Association Conference, University of Leeds, September 1983.

The extent of rural poverty is largely hidden, yet mean rural incomes are lower than in urban areas. Equally, the differential between low incomes and high minimum house prices in rural areas not always acknowledged. This paper looks at the planning response to these problems against alternative approaches including discriminatory policies against second home owners in rural areas. The paper concludes by identifying a solution restricting private development and augmenting public‐sector provision in rural areas.