1985•Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United KingdomRequires access

The Effect of Eyestalk Removal, Wounding and Limb Loss Upon Moulting and Proecdysis in the Prawn Palaemon Elegans (Rathke)

Simon George Webster

Open publisher page 11 citations

Abstract

Most current literature concerning moult control in crustaceans concludes that initiation of premoult is controlled by changes in the level of moult-inhibiting hormone (MIH) produced by the eyestalk neurosecretory organs. MIH is thought to act by repressing the secretory activity of the Y-organs, preventing increases in circulating ecdysteriod levels, necessary for moulting (see Kleinholz & Keller, 1979). This hypothesis is based upon the observation that eyestalk removal, by removing the source of MIH, leads to accelerated moulting (see Passano, 1960; Vernet-Cornubert, 1961; Sochasky, 1973, for reviews), and it survives despite many contrary reports indicating that moulting is unaffected by eyestalk removal (Sochasky, 1973). Perhaps the best known of the most contradictory data of this nature have been reported for Palaemon serratus for which Drach (1944, 1947), Panouse (1946, 1947) have shown that eyestalk removal generally accelerates moulting in this species. In contrast, Scheer & Scheer (1954) and Carlisle (1953) demonstrated no moult inhibition in this species following eyestalk removal.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Most current literature concerning moult control in crustaceans concludes that initiation of premoult is controlled by changes in the level of moult-inhibiting hormone (MIH) produced by the eyestalk neurosecretory organs. MIH is thought to act by repressing the secretory activity of the Y-organs, preventing increases in circulating ecdysteriod levels, necessary for moulting (see Kleinholz & Keller, 1979). This hypothesis is based upon the observation that eyestalk removal, by removing the source of MIH, leads to accelerated moulting (see Passano, 1960; Vernet-Cornubert, 1961; Sochasky, 1973, for reviews), and it survives despite many contrary reports indicating that moulting is unaffected by eyestalk removal (Sochasky, 1973). Perhaps the best known of the most contradictory data of this nature have been reported for Palaemon serratus for which Drach (1944, 1947), Panouse (1946, 1947) have shown that eyestalk removal generally accelerates moulting in this species. In contrast, Scheer & Scheer (1954) and Carlisle (1953) demonstrated no moult inhibition in this species following eyestalk removal.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 11 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Most current literature concerning moult control in crustaceans concludes that initiation of premoult is controlled by changes in the level of moult-inhibiting hormone (MIH) produced by the eyestalk neurosecretory organs. MIH is thought to act by repressing the secretory activity of the Y-organs, preventing increases in circulating ecdysteriod levels, necessary for moulting (see Kleinholz & Keller, 1979). This hypothesis is based upon the observation that eyestalk removal, by removing the source of MIH, leads to accelerated moulting (see Passano, 1960; Vernet-Cornubert, 1961; Sochasky, 1973, for reviews), and it survives despite many contrary reports indicating that moulting is unaffected by eyestalk removal (Sochasky, 1973). Perhaps the best known of the most contradictory data of this nature have been reported for Palaemon serratus for which Drach (1944, 1947), Panouse (1946, 1947) have shown that eyestalk removal generally accelerates moulting in this species. In contrast, Scheer & Scheer (1954) and Carlisle (1953) demonstrated no moult inhibition in this species following eyestalk removal.

Key concepts: Eyestalk, Moulting, Biology, Crustacean, Muda, Endocrinology, Internal medicine, Zoology

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
The Effect of Eyestalk Removal, Wounding and Limb Loss Upon Moulting and Proecdysis in the Prawn Palaemon Elegans (Rathke) — Research Paper | ScholarLens