Species Description:
The white shrimp, Penaeus setiferus, was
the first species of commercially important shrimp in the U.S., with the fishery
for this species dating back to 1709 (Muncy 1984). P. setiferus is common
in Florida waters and is generally found where water is less than 27 m deep (Muncy
1984). Antennae are significantly longer than body length, and may reach 2.5 –
3 times body length (Muncy 1984). Chromatophores in white shrimp are widely
spaced, thus lending a lighter body color to this species than in either pink or
brown shrimp. Overall body color is a bluish white, speckled with black, with
pink-tinged sides. Pleopods are often marked with dark red, while the margins of
the uropods of the tail are green along their margins (Williams 1984).
Its carapace has a medial carina (keel-like ridge) that
is continuous with the rostrum at the anterior end of the animal, and extends
posteriorly approximately 2/3 the length of the carapace. The rostrum is
elongate and slender, somewhat distally upcurved, with 5 – 11 (usually 9)
sharp teeth on the dorsal surface, and 2 teeth on the ventral edge. Unlike its
congeners P. aztecus and P. duorarum, P. setiferus has no
bordering groove along the carina. The integument is thin, and appears polished
and translucent.
The abdomen is carinate on segments 4 – 6, with the
carina of segment 6 having a narrow groove on either side. The telson has a deep
medial groove along its length, and a sharp tip. The ventral margin of the
pleura of the first segment is almost straight.
P. setiferus is
sexually dimorphic, with females growing larger than males. Additionally, the
female thelycum, which lies between pereopods 3- 5, is open and has raised
ridges along the anterolateral surface. The male pentasma has a diagonal ridge
across the dorsolateral lobe.
Synonymy:
Cancer setiferus Linnaeus, 1767
Other Taxonomic Groupings:
Subphylum: Crustacea
Subclass: Eumalacostraca
Suborder: Dendrobranchiata
II. HABITAT AND
DISTRIBUTION
Regional Occurrence:
White shrimp are known from Fire Island, New York
south to St. Lucie Inlet, Florida. The range then extends around the Florida
Peninsula into the Gulf of Mexico from the Ochlocknee River in northwest Florida
to Campeche, Mexico. Several centers of abundance have been identified for P.
setiferus. Primary among them is coastal Louisiana around the Mississippi
River Delta. Other abundance areas occur in northeast Florida, Georgia, and the
region around the Bay of Campeche, Mexico (Williams 1984).
IRL Distribution:
White shrimp are distributed throughout the Indian
River Lagoon and along the east central Florida coast where they are commonly
utilized as bait and for food.
III. LIFE HISTORY AND POPULATION BIOLOGY
Age, Size, Lifespan:
Large males measure approximately 182 mm in length.
Large females grow slightly larger and eventually reach 200 mm. Williams (1984)
reported that females beyond the juvenile stage are consistently larger than
males.
In estuaries, juvenile white shrimp grow approximately
1.2 mm per day during late spring and summer months (Williams 1965). Growth is
slow in spring, but quickens with the onset of summer. Growth rates decrease
during the fall months, but shrimp that remain in estuaries to overwinter resume
growing the following spring (Muncy 1984). Few white shrimp live as long as a
year (Anderson 1966), however, mark-recapture studies have revealed that some
white shrimp live from 27 months to as much as 4 years (Etzold and Christmas
1977; Klima et al. 1982).
Abundance:
Penaeus setiferus is a commercially valuable
fishery species and can be highly abundant throughout its range. Major abundance
centers are located from Georgia to Florida, Louisiana, and the Bay of Campeche,
Mexico.
Locomotion:
Penaeus setiferus actively swims, burrows
shallowly, and crawls.
Reproduction:
Mature males produce ripe sperm when they reach
lengths of approximately 118 mm. Females mature at lengths of approximately 135
– 140 mm. Gonadal development in females can be judged by ovary color.
Undeveloped ovaries are opaque and white in color. Developing ovaries appear
yellow, a stage which may last 1 – 2 months. Ripe ovaries are an olive color,
and may remain so until fully spent (generally in less than 1 month). Spent
ovaries quickly develop to the yellow stage within a few days, and will ripen
again within 2 – 3 months (King 1948; Brown and Patlan 1974).
Spawning behavior in P. setiferus is initiated
by an increase in offshore bottom water temperatures during spring (Whitaker
1981). In the Carolinas, spawning occurs from May through September (Williams
1955), while further south in the Gulf of Mexico, spawning occurs from March
through September. Williams (1965) and Joyce (1965) each reported only one
spawning period for P. setiferus. However, Gunter (1950) suggested spring
and fall spawning periods in Texas waters.
Spawning occurs as far as 9 km from the shore, in water
depths of at least 9 m (Whitaker 1983b), with females discharging eggs directly
to the water column without brooding them as is common in other crustaceans.
During copulation, which occurs between hard-shelled individuals, the male
attaches a spermatophore to the thelycum of a female. Spermatozoa are released
simultaneously with eggs from the female, with fertilization occurring in the
water column. Eggs are opaque with a blue-tinged chorion (Linder and Cook 1970)
and measure approximately 0.19 – 0.20 mm in diameter. Eggs sink to the bottom
of the water column as they are released, and hatch within 10 – 12 hours into
planktonic nauplii larvae that measure approximately 0.3 mm in length. Between
500,000 to 1 million eggs are released per spawn.
Embryology:
The larval period in P. setiferus lasts 10
days or more. Perez-Farfante (1969) reported 5 naupliar stages, 3 protozoeal
stages, 3 mysis stages, and 2 postlarval stages before the juvenile stage is
reached. The non-feeding nauplius stage undergoes 5 molts over 24 – 36 hours
to the protozoeal stage which measures approximately 1 mm in length. Feeding
behavior is initiated with the first protozoeal stage. Protozoea grow to a
length of approximately 2.5 mm before achieving the mysis stage. Following a
third mysis stage, the postlarval stage is attained.
Postlarvae of P. setiferus are planktonic,
gradually moving inshore to estuarine nursery grounds on tidal currents
(Whitaker 1983a). Most enter estuaries as second stage postlarvae measuring
approximately 7 mm in length. Upon reaching estuaries postlarvae become benthic
(Williams 1965). In North and South Carolina, postlarval P. setiferus
enter estuaries from June through September; in Georgia, postlarvae may enter
estuaries as early as April and May. In northeastern Florida, postlarvae first
begin to appear in early June.
Perez-Farfante (1969) considered postlarvae to be
juveniles once they had acquired 4 – 10 upper rostral teeth, and 1 to 3 lower
rostral teeth.
IV. PHYSICAL TOLERANCES
Temperature:
Growth in Penaeus setiferus occurs at
temperatures above 20 ° C (Etzold and Christmas
1977) with growth ceasing at temperatures below 16 °
C. Perez-Farfante (1969) reported that increasing temperatures increased molting
rates. Zein-Eldin (1964) found that inadequate temperature and food supply could
limit growth rates in P. setiferus more than salinity differences in the
range between 2 – 35 ppt.
Survival of white shrimp at low temperatures is
dependent on ambient temperatures, rate of cooling, and the duration of low
temperatures (Joyce 1965). Critical thermal minimum for this species is 8 °
C or lower (Joyce 1965), with the mortality rate being total at a temperature of
3 ° C or lower, regardless of salinity (Muncy 1984).
Adult P. setiferus may be somewhat more susceptible to cold temperatures
than are juveniles (Whitaker 1983a).
Burrowing has been studied as a behavioral response to
low temperatures (Aldrich et al. 1968). In laboratory studies, brown shrimp were
observed to burrow as temperatures fell below the 12 – 17 °
C range, and re-emerged from sediments when temperatures rose above 18 – 21.5°
C. White shrimp, however, showed no such response to lower temperatures, though
they are known to burrow shallowly during quiescent periods. It was hypothesized
from this result that burrowing would have more survival value to brown shrimp
than other congeners since brown shrimp are known to recruit to estuarine
habitats earlier in the year than other penaeids. White shrimp, for example,
arrive at coastal bays with the onset of summer, and thus would not be exposed
to the low temperatures that elicit the burrowing response in brown shrimp.
Salinity:
Juvenile white shrimp tend to move into the upper
reaches of estuaries to seek out low salinity waters more so than either pink or
brown shrimp (Williams 1958). In Louisiana, white shrimp have been sampled as
far as 160 km upriver; while in northeast Florida, they have been collected as
far upriver as 210 km (Perez-Farfante 1969).
The lowest recorded salinity from which white shrimp
have been reported was in the northern Gulf of Mexico, where salinity measures
0.42 ppt. In Florida, juvenile white shrimp have been collected in the St. John’s
River, Florida where salinity is generally less than 1.0 ppt. Muncy (1984)
reported that white shrimp have been recovered from the Lake Monroe Power
Station, a distance of 270 km from the mouth of the St. John’s River. High
concentrations of calcium ion in the St. John’s River may explain the ability
of white shrimp to thrive at such low salinity.
Spawning takes place in offshore waters when salinities
are at least 27 ppt. However, laboratory experiments have shown that larvae can
be successfully reared at a range of salinities between 18 – 34 ppt (Perez-Farfante
1969).
Parasitic Infestations and Diseases:
Parasites of white shrimp include
microsporidians, helminths, nematodes, and cestodes. Disease in white shrimp is
caused by exposure to viruses, fungi and bacteria such as Vibrio (Muncie
1984).
V. COMMUNITY ECOLOGY
Trophic Mode:
White shrimp larvae feed on both zooplankton such
as copepods, and phytoplankton such as unicellular green algae, and diatoms.
Juvenile and adult white shrimp are benthic omnivores that feed on detritus,
plants, microorganisms, macroinvertebrates (annelids, copepods, amphipods,
snails, bryozoans, etc.) and small fish (Muncy 1984). Cannibalism is also common
among adult white shrimp (Perez-Farfante 1969).
Competitors:
Penaeus setiferus is likely to compete with
its congeners P. aztecus and P. duorarum for resources as well as
for habitat. However, white shrimp are known to burrow more shallowly into muddy
substrata, and have been shown to be somewhat more active during daylight hours
than either brown or pink shrimp. Seasonal recruitment of the 3 common Penaeus
species into estuarine nursery grounds is also somewhat staggered, thus reducing
direct competition for resources.
Habitats:
Penaeus setiferus commonly inhabits
estuaries and the inner littoral zone along coasts to depths of approximately 30
m. In the Gulf of Mexico, P. setiferus can be found in depths as great as
80 m; however, they are most abundant in brackish wetlands with connections to
shallow, coastal areas.
Juvenile Penaeus setiferus prefer muddy
substrata rich in loose peat and sandy mud (Williams 1958). Anderson (1966)
reported that ideal nursery grounds for juvenile white shrimp are muddy bottom
areas in waters with low to moderate salinity.
Activity Time:
Juvenile white shrimp are generally more active in
daylight hours than juveniles of either pink or brown shrimp (Muncy 1984).
Associated Species:
White shrimp are often found in association with
other shrimp species, specifically the brown shrimp P. aztecus. Habitat
requirements between these 2 species are similar, and brown shrimp have been
observed to force white shrimp from sandy, muddy substrata (Rulifson 1981).
However, staggered recruitment periods between these species decreases direct
competition for resources.
VI. SPECIAL STATUS
Special Status:
Fisheries.
Benefit in IRL:
National Marine Fisheries Service data reported the
statewide commercial catch for white shrimp in Florida between 1987 - 2001 to be
52.3 million pounds with a dollar value of $139.2 million.

Figure 1. Annual dollar value of
the commercial catch of white shrimp to the 5-county area
of the Indian River Lagoon.

Figure 2. Total white
shrimp dollar value and percentage by county for the years
1987 - 2001.
|
|
Volusia |
Brevard |
Indian River |
St. Lucie |
Martin |
Total |
|
|
Value |
Value |
Value |
Value |
Value |
Value |
|
YEAR |
($) |
($) |
($) |
($) |
($) |
to IRL |
|
1987 |
$804,740 |
$817,193 |
$0 |
$0 |
$0 |
$1,621,933 |
|
1988 |
$0 |
$607,158 |
$0 |
$0 |
$0 |
$607,158 |
|
1989 |
$576,954 |
$533,043 |
$0 |
$0 |
$0 |
$1,109,997 |
|
1990 |
$670,183 |
$555,483 |
$0 |
$80 |
$0 |
$1,225,746 |
|
1991 |
$346,511 |
$311,784 |
$0 |
$0 |
$0 |
$658,295 |
|
1992 |
$266,409 |
$732,097 |
$0 |
$0 |
$0 |
$998,506 |
|
1993 |
$253,309 |
$607,116 |
$0 |
$0 |
$0 |
$860,425 |
|
1994 |
$237,818 |
$750,751 |
$0 |
$0 |
$0 |
$988,569 |
|
1995 |
$299,235 |
$1,732,523 |
$0 |
$0 |
$0 |
$2,031,758 |
|
1996 |
$323,508 |
$885,956 |
$0 |
$0 |
$0 |
$1,209,464 |
|
1997 |
$202,050 |
$1,405,153 |
$0 |
$0 |
$0 |
$1,607,203 |
|
1998 |
$211,577 |
$881,876 |
$0 |
$0 |
$0 |
$1,093,453 |
|
1999 |
$104,669 |
$3,133,698 |
$0 |
$0 |
$0 |
$3,238,367 |
|
2000 |
$104,090 |
$1,585,929 |
$0 |
$0 |
$0 |
$1,690,019 |
|
2001 |
$80,975 |
$2,200,710 |
$0 |
$0 |
$0 |
$2,281,685 |
|
Cumulative
Totals: |
$4,482,028 |
$16,740,470 |
$0 |
$80 |
$0 |
$21,222,578 |
Table 1. Total dollar value of the IRL
harvest of white shrimp, Penaeus setiferus,
between
1987 -2001.
|
|
Volusia |
Brevard |
Indian River |
St. Lucie |
Martin |
|
|
% |
% |
% |
% |
% |
|
YEAR |
Total |
Total |
Total |
Total |
Total |
|
1987 |
49.6% |
50.4% |
0.0% |
0.0% |
0.0% |
|
1988 |
0.0% |
100.0% |
0.0% |
0.0% |
0.0% |
|
1989 |
52.0% |
48.0% |
0.0% |
0.0% |
0.0% |
|
1990 |
54.7% |
45.3% |
0.0% |
0.0% |
0.0% |
|
1991 |
52.6% |
47.4% |
0.0% |
0.0% |
0.0% |
|
1992 |
26.7% |
73.3% |
0.0% |
0.0% |
0.0% |
|
1993 |
29.4% |
70.6% |
0.0% |
0.0% |
0.0% |
|
1994 |
24.1% |
75.9% |
0.0% |
0.0% |
0.0% |
|
1995 |
14.7% |
85.3% |
0.0% |
0.0% |
0.0% |
|
1996 |
26.7% |
73.3% |
0.0% |
0.0% |
0.0% |
|
1997 |
12.6% |
87.4% |
0.0% |
0.0% |
0.0% |
|
1998 |
19.3% |
80.7% |
0.0% |
0.0% |
0.0% |
|
1999 |
3.2% |
96.8% |
0.0% |
0.0% |
0.0% |
|
2000 |
6.2% |
93.8% |
0.0% |
0.0% |
0.0% |
|
2001 |
3.5% |
96.5% |
0.0% |
0.0% |
0.0% |
Table 2. By-county
percentage of the white shrimp harvest for the years 1987-2001.
|
|
Volusia |
Brevard |
Indian River |
St. Lucie |
Martin |
|
Dollars |
$4,482,028 |
$16,740,470 |
$0 |
$80 |
$0 |
|
% |
21.1% |
78.9% |
0.0% |
0.0% |
0.0% |
Table 3. By county cumulative dollar
value and percentage of total for the IRL white shrimp
harvest from 1987 - 2001.
VII. BIBLIOGRAPHY
Aldrich, D.V., C.E. Wood, and K.N. Baxter. 1968. An
ecological interpretation
of low temperature responses in Penaeus aztecus
and P. setiferus
postlarvae. Bull. Mar. Sci. 18(1):61-71.
Anderson, W.W. 1966. The shrimp and the shrimp fishery
of the southern United
States. U.S. Fish and Wildl. Serv. Bur. Commer. Fish.
Fish. Leafl. 589. 8 pp.
Brown, A., Jr. and D. Patlan. 1974. Color changes in
the ovaries of penaeid
shrimp as a determinant of their maturity. Mar. Fish.
Rev., 36(7):23-26,
colored figures 1-12.
Etzold, D.J. and J.Y. Christmas. 1977. A comprehensive
summary of the shrimp
fishery of the Gulf of Mexico United States: a regional
management plan. Gulf
Coast Res. Lab. Tech. Rept. Ser. No. 2, part 2. 20 pps.
Gunter, G. 1950. Seasonal population changes and
distributions as related to
salinity, of certain invertebrates if the Texas coast,
including the commercial
shrimp. Publications of the Inst. of Mar. Sci., Texas,
1(2):7-51.
Joyce, E.A. 1965. The commercial shrimps of the
northeast coast of Florida. Fl.
Board Conserv. Mar. Lab. Prof. Pap. Ser. 6. 224 pp.
King, J.E. 1948. A study of the reproductive organs of
the common marine
shrimp, Penaeus setiferus (Linnaeus). Biol.
Bull. 94(3):244-262
Klima, E.F., K.N. Baxter, and F.J. Patella, Jr. 1982. A
review of the offshore
shrimp fishery and the 1981 Texas closure. Mar., Fish.
Rev. 44:16-30.
Linder, M.J. and H.L. Cook. 1970. Synopsis of
biological data on the white
shrimp Penaeus setiferus (Linnaeus) 1767. FAO
Fisheries Synopsis 101.
FAO Fish. Rep. 4:1439-1469.
Muncy, R.J. 1984. Species profiles: life histories and
environmental requirements
of coastal fishes and invertebrates (south Atlantic):
white shrimp. U.S. Fish and
Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/11.27. U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers, TR
EL-82-4. 19 pp.
Perez-Farfante, I. 1969. Western Atlantic shrimps of
the genus Penaeus. U.S.
Fish Wildl. Serv. Fish. Bull. 67(3):461-591.
Rulifson, R.A. 1981. Substrate preference of juvenile
penaeid shrimp in estuarine
habitats. Contrib. Mar. Sci. 24:35-52.
Whitaker, J.D. 1981. Biology of the species and habitat
descriptions. In M.D.
McKenzie, ed. Profile of the penaeid shrimp fishery in
the south Atlantic.
South Atlantic Manag. Council, Charleston, SC.
Whitaker, J.D. 1983a. Effects of severe winters on
white shrimp stocks in the
Atlantic Ocean off the southeastern United States. Presented
at Natl. Shellfish
Assoc. Hiltonhead, SC. June 1983. 6 pp.
Whitaker, J.D. 1983b. Roe shrimp tagging 1983. Proj.
Rep. S.C. Wildl. Mar.
Res. Dep., Charleston, SC. 4 pp.
Williams, A.B. 1955. A contribution to the life
histories of commercial shrimps
(Penaeidae) in North Carolina. Bulletin of Marine
Science of the Gulf and
Caribbean 5(2):116-146.
Williams, A.B. 1958. Substrates as a factor in shrimp
distribution. Limnol. and
Oceanogr. 3(3):283-290.
Williams, A.B. 1965. Marine decapod crustaceans of the
Carolinas. Fish. Bull.,
65(1):I-xi + 298 pages.
Williams, A.B. 1984. Shrimps, lobsters and crabs of
the Atlantic coast of the
eastern United States, Maine to Florida.
Smithsonian Institution Press.
Washington, D.C. 550 pp.
Zein-Eldin, Z.P. 1964. Growth and metabolism. U.S. Bur.
Commer. Fish. Circ.
183:65-67.
Report by: K. Hill,
Smithsonian Marine Station
Submit additional information, photos or comments to:
irl_webmaster@si.edu
Page last updated: July 9, 2002
|