Hostname: page-component-594f858ff7-jtv8x Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2023-06-06T09:02:01.669Z Has data issue: false Feature Flags: { "corePageComponentGetUserInfoFromSharedSession": false, "coreDisableEcommerce": false, "corePageComponentUseShareaholicInsteadOfAddThis": true, "coreDisableSocialShare": false, "useRatesEcommerce": true } hasContentIssue false

The Shell of Cardium Edule, Cardium Glaucum and Ruditapes Philippinarum: Organic Content, Composition and Energy Value, As Determined by Different Methods

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 May 2009

P. Goulletquer
IFREMER, Laboratoire National Ecosystèmes Conchylicoles, B.P. 133, 17390 La Tremblade, France
M. Wolowicz
IFREMER, Laboratoire National Ecosystèmes Conchylicoles, B.P. 133, 17390 La Tremblade, France


The organic content of the shells of molluscs can represent a significant fraction of the total organic content (Bernard, 1974) but it is often neglected in calculations of energy budgets in these animals. This may be in part due to uncertainty about the true values, since published estimates of the organic content of shells show quite wide variation. The species examined and also the provenance of the selected samples contribute to this variation as does also the method of measurement. The methods principally used have been by ignition at various temperatures from 400 to 550°C for various durations between 2 and 36 h (see Shumway & Newell, 1984; Jørgensen, 1976; Mohlenberg & Kiorboe, 1981; Vahl, 1981; Shafee, 1979; Price et al, 1976) or by acid extraction using different extraction proceedures (see Ivell, 1979; Dame, 1972; Horn, 1986; Griffiths & King, 1979). To calculate the energy content of the organic component some investigators have used the Hughes (1970) coefficient of 5.037 cal mg-1, while others have used Paine's (1971) protein coefficient of 2.39 J g-1. Wilbur & Saleuddin (1983) have called attention to the need for more study of these analyses. We present here the results of a study of the shell organic content of three species of molluscs, using two methods for the measurement and giving data on biochemical composition and energy value.

Research Article
Copyright © Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom 1989

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)



Bernard, F.R., 1974. Annual biodeposition and gross energy budget of mature Pacific oysters, Crassostrea gigas. Journal of the Fisheries Research Board of Canada, 31, 185190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beukema, J.J., 1981. Calcimass and carbonate production by molluscs on the tidal flats in the Dutch Wadden Sea., I. The tellinid bivalve Macoma balthica. Netherlands Journal of Sea Research, 14, 323338.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bligh, J.G. & Dyer, W.F., 1959. A rapid method of total lipid extraction and purification. Canadian Journal of Biochemistry and Physiology, 37, 911917.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Brody, S., 1945. Bioenergetics and Growth. New York: Reinhold.Google Scholar
Crenshaw, M.A., 1972. The soluble matrix from Mercenaria mercenaria shell. Biomineralization, 6, 611.Google Scholar
Dame, R.F., 1972. The ecological energies of growth, respiration and assimilation in the intertidal American oyster Crassostrea virginica. Marine Biology, 17, 243250.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dubois, M., Gilles, K.A., Hamilton, J.K., Rebecs, P. A. & Smith, F., 1956. Colorimetric method for determination of sugars and related substances. Analytical Chemistry, 28, 350356.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Giese, A.G., 1967. Some methods for study of the biochemical constitution of marine invertebrates. Oceanography and Marine Biology, an Annual Review, 5, 159186.Google Scholar
Gregoire, C., 1972. Structure of the molluscan shell. In Chemical Zoology. VII. Mollusca (ed. M., Florkin and B.T., Scheer), pp. 45102. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Griffiths, C.L. & King, J.A., 1979. Energy expended on growth and gonad output in the ribbed mussel Aulacomya ater. Marine Biology, 53, 217222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Griffiths, R.J., 1981. Population dynamics and growth of the bivalve Choromytilus meridionalis (Kr) at different tidal levels. Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science, 12, 101118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hawkins, A.J.S. & Bayne, B.L., 1985. Seasonal variation in the relative utilization of carbon and nitrogen by the mussel Mytilus edulis, budgets, conversion efficiencies and maintenance requirements. Marine Ecology - Progress Series, 25, 181188.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hibbert, C.J., 1976. Biomass and production of a bivalve community on an intertidal mud-flat. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology, 25, 249261.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Horn, P.L., 1986. Energetics of Chiton pelliserpentis (Quoy and Gaimard, 1935) (Mollusca, Polyplacophora) and the importance of mucus in its energy budget. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology, 101, 119141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hughes, R.N., 1970. An energy budget for a tidal-flat population of the bivalve Scrobicularia plana (da Costa). Journal of Animal Ecology, 39, 357379.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ivell, R., 1979. The biology and ecology of a brackish lagoon bivalve, Cerastoderma glaucum B. in an English lagoon, the Widewater, Sussex. Journal of Molluscan Studies, 45, 383400.Google Scholar
Jørgensen, C.B., 1976. Growth efficiencies and factors controlling size in some mytilid bivalves, especially Mytilus edulis L.: review and interpretation. Ophelia, 15, 175192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kennedy, W.J., Taylor, J.D. & Hall, H., 1969. Environmental and biological controls on bivalve shell mineralogy. Biological Reviews, 144, 499530.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lowry, O.H., Rosebrough, N.I., Farrand, A.L. & Randall, R.J., 1951. Protein measurement with the folin phenol reagent. Journal of Biological Chemistry, 193, 263275.Google ScholarPubMed
Marsh, J.B. & Weinstein, D.B., 1966. Sample charring method for determination of lipid. Journal of Lipid Research, 7, 574576.Google Scholar
Mohlenberg, F. & Kiorboe, T., 1981. Growth and energetics in Spisula subtruncata (da Costa) and the effect of suspended bottom material. Ophelia, 20, 7990.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paine, R.T., 1964. Ash and caloric determinations of sponge and opisthobranch tissues. Ecology, 45, 384387.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paine, R.T., 1971. Energy flow in a natural population of the herbivorous gastropod Tegula funebralis. Limnology and Oceanography, 16, 8698.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Phillipson, J., 1964. A miniature bomb calorimeter for small biological samples. Oikos, 15, 130139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Price, T.J., Thayer, G.W., Lacroix, M.W. & Montgomery, G.P., 1976. The organic content of shells and soft tissues of selected estuarine gastropods and pelecypods. Proceedings. National Shellfisheries Association, 65, 2631.Google Scholar
Rodhouse, P.G., Roden, C.M., Hensey, M.P. & Ryan, T.H., 1984. Resource allocation in Mytilus edulis on the shore and in suspended culture. Marine Biology, 84,2734.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shafee, M., 1979. Ecological energy requirements of the green mussel, Perna viridis Linnaeus from Ennore estuary, Madras. Oceanologica Ada, 2, 6974.Google Scholar
Shumway, S.E. & Newell, R.C., 1984. Energy resource allocation in Mulinia lateralis (Say), an opportunistic bivalve from shallow water sediments. Ophelia, 23,101118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Snedecor, G.W. & Cochran, W.G., 1967. Statistical Methods, 6th ed.Ames, Iowa: Iowa State University Press.Google Scholar
Vahl, O., 1981. Energy transformations by the iceland scallop, Chlamys islandica (O.F. Müller) from 70°N. I. The age-specific energy budget and net growth efficiency. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology, 53, 281296.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilbur, K.M. & Saleuddin, A.S.M., 1983. Shell formation. In The Mollusca, vol. 4. Physiology (ed. K.M., Wilbur and A.S.M., Saleuddin), pp. 236287. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Wilbur, K.M. & Simkiss, K., 1968. Calcified shells. In Comprehensive Biochemistry, vol. 26a (ed. M., Florkin and E.H., Stotz), pp. 229295. New York: Elsevier.Google Scholar