The preferred prey size of

Sepia officinalis

Figure 1: Sepia
officinalis

Kirsty Prendergrast
FdSc Marine science
FDMS CORF 208 Projects
Supervised by Craig Baldwin

Kirsty Prendergrast
FdSc Marine Science

Content
Pages numbers
Abstract

List of figures

List of tables

Introduction

5-6

Methodology

7 - 13

Ethical review

14 - 15

Results

16 - 19

Discussion

20 - 21

Conclusion

22 - 23

Recommendations

24 - 25

Acknowledgement

26

References

27 - 31

Appendices

Kirsty Prendergrast
FdSc Marine Science

Abstract
This investigation was to examine whether Sepia officinalis, had a preferred prey
size, and if this was linked to the size of Sepia officinalis. The investigation was
carried out at Falmouth Marine School in February 2015, and was carried out over a
period of two days. A total of seven Sepia officinalis where used in the trial, which
took place at Falmouth Marine School, and three different prey sizes were tested
(two centimetres, three centimetres and six centimetres). The results which were
collected from this investigation, where combined with results from similar
investigations which were carried out at the National Marine Aquarium Plymouth and
Merlin in Weymouth. The information from all three of these investigations, where
used in an ANOVA statistical test, to determine whether there was a statically
significant difference in the data. The results from the ANOVA statistical test
indicated that there were statistically significant differences in the data, which in turn
meant that there was a preferred prey size of Sepia officinalis. From further tests
which were run on the data, it was possible to determine an average preferred prey
size of Sepia officinalis, for any mantle length.

Kirsty Prendergrast
FdSc Marine Science

List of figures
Figure 1. Sepia officinalis
Figure 2. Cuttlefish 1
Figure 3. Cuttlefish 2
Figure 4. Cuttlefish 3
Figure 5. Cuttlefish 4
Figure 6. Cuttlefish 5
Figure 7. Cuttlefish 6
Figure 8. Cuttlefish 7
Figure 9. Cuttlefish 8
Figure 10. Mantle length of Sepia officinalis
Figure 11. Sepia officinalis tank
Figure 12. King Prawn measurement
Figure 13. A graph showing the average preferred prey size, for each of Sepia
officinalis mantle lengths, used in this investigation.
Figure 14. A graph showing all the data which had been collected from the
investigation before being used in ANOVA statistically tests.

Kirsty Prendergrast
FdSc Marine Science

List of tables
Table 1. Example of results table
Table 2. Ethical review
Table 3. Preferred prey size results from other institutes
Table 4. Preferred prey size result from investigation carried out at Falmouth Marine
School
Table 5. Combined results from Falmouth Marine School and the other institutes
Table 6. Calculations and result from the one way ANOVA statistical test
Table 7. Risk assessment
Table 8. Data used to calculate an overall average preferred prey size.

Kirsty Prendergrast
FdSc Marine Science

Introduction
In the Class Cephalopoda, there are known to be between six hundred and fifty and
seven hundred species in the world (Wheeler and Fautin, 2001). Cephalopoda are
known to be relativity short lived animals, which are only capable of reproducing
once (Barnes, Calow and Olive, 1993). Most Cephalopoda are known to be active
predators, which feed on mobile prey. The growth rate of Cephalopoda species can
be three to ten percent of their body weight per day (Evans, 2012). Due to
Cephalopoda having a short life cycle and a high growth rate. This means that they
have high energy requirements no matter what the food source (Alves et al., 2006).
The public interest in Cephalopod species has grown. Sepia officinalis, also known
as common European cuttlefish, is also well known in scientific research due to the
advanced colour change capabilities. Sepia officinalis are one of the easiest
Cephalopod species to be kept in aquaria, as well as being the most common
species of cuttlefish available to aquaria (Wood, 1998a). In recent years there has
seen an increase in the use of Sepia officinalis and other species of cuttlefish in
aquaculture, due to the economical and biological aspects which are displayed.
These economical and biological characteristics have potential use in industrial
culture (Sykes, Gonalves and Andrade, 2013). Sepia officinalis can easily be
adapted for culture within a laboratory, this is due; to high hatching survival rate; a
tolerance to crowding as well as handing; easy to reproduce in captivity; large eggs;
hatchlings which require a large amount of food; sedentary behaviour and they are
willing to accept dead prey items. Due to these factors Sepia officinalis have been

Kirsty Prendergrast
FdSc Marine Science

successfully cultured within laboratories throughout the world since the early 1960s
(Domingues, Bettencourt and Guerra, 2006).
Sepia officinalis are known to be ambush predators, which prey on a variety of
different food sources, these include; fish and crustaceans, however they have been
known to feed on other food sources as well (Compton and Wiley, 2011). Sepia
officinalis have two different methods of capturing prey, these include the pounce
method which is where Sepia officinalis pounces on their prey, whilst using their
arms to hold their prey. The other method is where Sepia officinalis shoots out its two
tentacles to grab the prey, and pull it back to their mouth (Compton and Wiley, 2011).
Investigations have been carried out to look into the preferred prey of both juvenile
and adult Sepia officinalis (Castro and Guerra, 1989; BLANC, DU SEL and
DAGUZAN, 1998; Darmaillacq et al., 2004; Alves et al., 2006; Neves et al., 2009;
Evans, 2012). This research was carried out by capturing Sepia officinalis, and
examining the contents of the stomach (Castro and Guerra, 1989; BLANC, DU SEL
and DAGUZAN, 1998; Alves et al., 2006; Neves et al., 2009; Evans, 2012 ).
Research investigations which looked at the stomach contents, have stated within
the papers that as the Sepia officinalis grow in size, the size of the prey also
increases, however these previous studies only noted this connection between these
factors. A previous study carried out by Blanc and Daguzan, (2000), looked at the
prey size consumed by young Sepia officinalis. Had stated that Sepia officinalis
consume a wide range of different prey sizes.
The aim of this investigation was to determine if there was a preferred prey size, of
Sepia officinalis and whether this linked into the size of the Sepia officinalis and the

Kirsty Prendergrast
FdSc Marine Science

size of prey they chose to feed upon. The hypotheses which will be tested in this
investigation is, Do Sepia officinalis have a preferred prey size?

Methodology
Eleven Sepia officinalis specimens were given to Falmouth Marine School, from
Newquay Blue Reef Aquarium on the North Coast of Cornwall, they were brought
over in October 2014. The Sepia officinalis were housed in a four hundred litre tank,
which had a layer of washed silicon sand on the bottom which allowed the Sepia
officinalis to bury themselves into the sand. A canister filter was used to filter the tank
water and an air stone was placed in the tank to air-rate the water. A ten percent
water change was carried out a weekly basis (however this number did increase
when there were water quality issues). Water quality was also checked on a weekly
basis, however salinity, ammonia and temperature were checked on a daily basis
and recorded. Sepia officinalis were housed in identical sized tanks throughout their
time at Falmouth Marine School. They were moved in December 2014 due to a
rebuild at Falmouth Marine School, and the investigation was carried out over two
days in February 2015. Before the investigation was carried out, three Sepia
officinalis were unfortunately eaten by the other Sepia officinalis in the tank, also just
before the investigation was due to take place, one of them was unfortunately found
dead in the tank (figure 5).
Before the investigation was carried out a photo identification sheet was created for
each of the cuttlefish so that it was possible to identify the Sepia officinalis (figures 29). Their identifying marking were either scars or deformities on the body, markings
and colouration on the skirt, markings on the underside or any other factors which
7

Kirsty Prendergrast
FdSc Marine Science

can be used as identification. Also the measuring of the mantle length for each of the
Sepia officinalis was carried out by placing a strip of zero point five millimetre
squared paper along the bottom of the tank (figure 10). This meant that when the
Sepia officinalis were at the front of the tank, it was possible to get a measurement
for each of them. Each of the Sepia officinalis mantle lengths were recorded to the
nearest zero point five of a millimetre (figure 11). These measurements were noted
down on the photo identification sheets (figures 2 9).
For this investigation six king prawns were defrosted in a jug using water from the
Sepia officinalis tank. Once the prawns had defrosted each of the prawns were
measured using a fifteen centimetre ruler. The lengths of each of the six prawns
were noted down and an average length for the prawns was then worked out. It was
then calculated which three different lengths of prawn would be used in the
investigation (figure 12). The average lengths were six centimetres, as that was the
maximum length of prawn which would be used in the investigation. The average
was then halved to 3 centimetres, which was the second length used in the
investigation. This was then halved again to one point five centimetres, which when
rounded up to the closest whole number. Two centimetres was the third and final
length of prawn which was used in the investigation.
The investigation used of three pieces of prawn, which were six centimetres in
length, five piece of prawn which were three centimetres in length and six piece of
prawn which were two centimetres in length. This meant that the number of prawns
needed to be defrosted was eight (however this number increased or decreased
depending on the size of the king prawns). Once the pieces of prawn had been cut
into the three different sizes, the king prawns where then taken over to the Sepia
officinalis tank, where a range of different sized pieces of prawn where placed into
8

Kirsty Prendergrast
FdSc Marine Science

the Sepia officinalis tank. From the results a table (table 1) was created, to record
which Sepia officinalis fed on which prey size. The results table consisted of four
columns, the first column had the cuttlefish one to seven written down which linked
to the labels for each of the Sepia officinalis, the second column has two
centimetres, the third three centimetres and the fourth column was six centimetres,
which related to the prey size.
Once the different prey sizes had been placed in the tank, and the Sepia officinalis
had finished eating, any uneaten food was removed from the tank after ten minutes.
This investigation was repeated over the second day. The results which were
collected from this investigation which was ran at Falmouth Marine School were
combined with results from similar investigations carried out at the National Marine
Aquarium Plymouth and Merlin in Weymouth. These results where then used in a
one way ANOVA statistical test.
Cuttlefish 1

White dotted line around frill edge

Cuttlefish 2
6cm

Figure 2: Cuttlefish 1

9
Small bumps along the back.

7cm

Kirsty Prendergrast
FdSc Marine Science

Figure 3: Cuttlefish 2
Cuttlefish 3

Lump on its back.

Scares over the body.

Scares under the eyes.

5cm

Figure 4: Cuttlefish 3
Cuttlefish 4 - DIED

Cuttlefish 5

Figure 5: Cuttlefish 4

Small lump on tail.

10

6cm

Kirsty Prendergrast
FdSc Marine Science

Figure 6: Cuttlefish 5

Cuttlefish 6

White lump on tail.

5cm

Figure 7: Cuttlefish 6

Cuttlefish 7

White line around skirt.

Cuttlefish 8

Dark line around skirt.

6cm

Figure 8: Cuttlefish 7

11

8cm

Kirsty Prendergrast
FdSc Marine Science

Figure 9: Cuttlefish 8

Figure 10: Mantle length of Sepia officinalis

Strip of 0.5 mm squared paper.

12

Kirsty Prendergrast
FdSc Marine Science

Prey size
Figure 2
11:
Sepia officinalis tank
centimetres
3 centimetres

6 centimetres

Cuttlefish 1
Cuttlefish 2
Cuttlefish 3
Cuttlefish 4
Cuttlefish 5
Cuttlefish 6
Cuttlefish 7

Table 1 Example of results table

13

Kirsty Prendergrast
FdSc Marine Science

Figure 12: King Prawn measurement

Ethic review
Sepia officinalis where housed in a safe environment, for the duration of the
investigation. Should there have been any factors which, could have caused health
and safety issues to Sepia officinalis, it was the researchers responsibility and
priority, to alter the investigation procedure, in order to remove or reduce any of
these factors. (Table 2)

Table 2 Ethical review

Factors
What size and style

Considerations/ response
Depending on the number of specimens that are planned to

of tank do Sepia

be held in the tank, the size requirements can vary. Some

officinalis need to

scientific papers suggest a tank which is between twenty

be housed in?

thousand litre to one hundred thousand litres (Jones and

McCarthy, 2013), and other research states a forty gallon
tank (Wood, 1998b). Sepia officinalis can be kept in both
round and square tanks. Smaller Sepia officinalis require a
smaller tank.
14

Kirsty Prendergrast
FdSc Marine Science

What are the ideal

The ideal temperature for housing Sepia officinalis at is

tank conditions that

between 15 C to 25 C (Wood, 1998b). Water within the

Sepia officinalis

tank needs to be well oxygenated between seven and nine

need to be housed

milligrams per litre (Hanley et al., 1998), as well as being

at?

clean. Sepia officinalis are very sensitive to heavy metals

which can be found in the water, so it is important that there
is no trace of metals in the water (Wood, 1998b). A pH level
of between seven point eight to eight point ten, a salinity
level of between twenty-nine parts per thousand and thirty
three parts per thousand, a nitrate level of less than zero
point two milligrams per litre and nitrite levels less than one
milligram per litre (Hanley et al., 1998), and ammonia
should be at zero, as ammonia is poisonous in the smallest

Do Sepia officinalis

of levels.
Yes, males should be kept away from other males so that

need to be housed

fights between each other will not break out (Wood, 1998b).

separately?
How often should a

A ten percent water change should be carried out on a

water change be

weekly basis, this may be increased depending on the

carried out in the

water quality in the tank.

Sepia officinalis
tank?
What other cleaning

Any uneaten or part eaten food should be removed on a

protocols should be

daily basis, as well as any dead Sepia officinalis. The

carried out?

protein skimmer should be cleaned on a weekly basis and

the filter should be cleaned on a monthly basis (Jones and
McCarthy, 2013).
15

Kirsty Prendergrast
FdSc Marine Science

How often as well

Sepia officinalis should be fed on a daily basis, but can be

as how much

fed twice daily if needed (Jones and McCarthy, 2013 ).

should Sepia

Sepia officinalis like other cephalopods have a high feed

officinalis be feed?

rate, which varies between twenty and fifty percent body

What are the signs

weight per day (Domingues, Bettencourt and Guerra, 2006)

Signs of stress should be checked for on a daily basis,

of stress to Sepia

these signs include pacing the tank, sitting under the pump

officinalis and how

outlet for prolonged periods of time, looking pale and being

often should these

motionless for more than a three day period, large patches

signs be checked

of white skin forming and autocannibalism also known as

for?

autophagy (Slater and Buttling, 2011) (the practice in which an

What are the signs

organisms eats itself) (Kirkwood and Hubrecht, 2010).

Signs of health should be checked for a daily basis, these

of health issues to

include scratches, which have left white patches on the

Sepia officinalis and

skin, which will heal in juvenile Sepia officinalis, however in

how often should

adult specimens this will not happen. Signs of poor health

these signs be

conditions also include, sitting under the pump outlet for a

checked for?

longer periods of time, pacing the tank, motionless and

looking pale for longer than a three day period, large
patches of white skin forming, as well as autocanniablism
(Slater and Buttling, 2011). These signs are the same as

Could the

those for stress.

Yes.

investigation cause
problems the health
or stress problems
to Sepia officinalis?
16

Kirsty Prendergrast
FdSc Marine Science

Could the

No.

investigation cause
pain to Sepia
officinalis?
After the

After the investigation has been completed, the Sepia

investigation has

officinalis will be kept in the same tank, which they have

taken place what

been housed in during the investigation, and if fighting

will happen to Sepia

between specimens where to break out, the large or

officinalis?

problematic Sepia officinalis will be moved into a separate

tank.

Results
A total of a five hundred and twenty nine Sepia officinalis were used in this
investigation. Of which five hundred and twenty two Sepia officinalis were used in the
similar investigations at National Marine Aquarium Plymouth and Merlin in
Weymouth, and seven Sepia officinalis were used in the investigation which were
carried out at Falmouth Marine School.
The data that was collected in these investigations was used in a one way ANOVA
statistical test. This is because the one way ANOVA statistical test can be used on
both parametric and nonparametric data, and is used to determine if there is a
statistical different between three or more sets of data. The one way ANOVA

17

Kirsty Prendergrast
FdSc
Marine Science
Preferred prey size (observation) (shrimp/ prawns)

Mantle

0.5cm 1cm

2cm

3cm

5cm

97
22
8
5
3
0
0
0
0
0

3
6
41
25
15
15
0
0
0
0

10
15
15
18
2
0
0
0

4
10
12
8
4
2
0

6cm

7cm

8cm

9cm

10cm

length
(number of
specimens
)
1cm (123)
2cm (86)
3cm (71)
4cm (59)
5cm (53)
6cm (41)
7cm (35)
8cm (28)
9cm (19)
10cm (7)

23
58
12
10
7
1
0
0
0
0

3
18
20
15
5

7
4
2
2

statistical test calculates the mean of the three or more groups of data, and
determines if there is statistical different between these means. The ANOVA
statistical test is used to determine whether to accept the null hypotheses, H0: U 1 =
U2 = U3 = Uk. Where U equals the group mean and k equals the number of groups.
If the result from the ANOVA test, shows that there is a statistical difference, this
means that the alternative hypotheses can be accepted (Lund Research Ltd, 2013).
Table 3, shows the result which have been collected from similar investigations
which were carried out at National Marine Aquarium Plymouth, and Merlin in
Weymouth. Table 4, shows the result which have been collected from the
investigation which was carried out Falmouth Marine School. Table 5, shows the
results which were collected from the investigation in regard to the preferred prey
size of Sepia officinalis, and these results were used in the one way ANOVA test.
Table 3 - Preferred prey size results from other institutes

18

Kirsty Prendergrast
FdSc
Marine Science
Preferred prey size (observation) (shrimp/ prawns)

Mantle

0.5cm 1cm

2cm

3cm

5cm

6cm

7cm

8cm

9cm

10cm

9cm

10cm

length
(number of
specimens
)
1cm (123)
2cm (86)
3cm (71)
4cm (60)
Mantle
5cm (55)
6cm (43)
length
7cm (36)
8cm
(29) of
(number
9cm (19)
10cm
(7)
specimens

97
23
3
22
58
6
8
12
41
10
Preferred prey size (observation) (shrimp/ prawns)
5
10
28
17
4
0.5cm 1cm 2cm 3cm 5cm 6cm 7cm 8cm
3
7
14
15
10
3
0
1
17
20
12
3
0
0
1
4
8
18
7
0
0
0
1
4
21
4
0
0
0
0
2
15
2
0
0
0
0
0
5
2

)
1cm
2cm
3cm
4cm (1)
3
2
5cm (2)
4
5
6cm (2)
2
2
3
7cm (1)
1
2
8cm (1)
1
1
9cm
10cm
Table 4 Preferred prey size result from investigation carried out at Falmouth Marine
School

Table 5 Combined results from Falmouth Marine School and the other institutes

19

Kirsty Prendergrast
FdSc Marine Science

Once the results from other institutes and Falmouth Marine school had be combined
(table 5), these results where then used in the one way ANOVA statistical test (table
6). These indicated that there was a statistical difference between the sets of data
that had been collected, however it was unclear which data sets were statistically
different and further data analysis was needed.
From the results which were collected from the investigation carried out in Falmouth
Marine School as well as the other institutes, that were used to collect an average
preferred prey size for the different mantle length of Sepia officinalis which were
used in the investigation (figure 13), the following conclusion was reached. The
overall average size of prey which Sepia officinalis feed upon is equal to 60.3% of its
mantle length.

20

Kirsty Prendergrast
FdSc Marine Science

Table 6 SUMMARY
Groups
1cm

Averag
e
41
28.666
67

Count
3

Sum
123

2cm

86

3cm
4cm
5cm

4
5
6

71
64
60

6cm

53

7cm

38

8cm

30

9cm

19

17.75
12.8
10
8.8333
33
5.4285
71
4.2857
14
2.7142
86

10cm

MS
614.37
34
197.10
27

ANOVA
Source of
Variation
Between
Groups
Within
Groups

SS
5529.3
6
8869.6
21

Total

14398.
98

df

45

Varian
ce
2452
709.33
33
242.91
67
98.7
50.4
74.966
67
41.285
71
57.571
43
30.238
1
3.6666
67

F
3.1170
22

Pvalue
0.005
36

F crit
2.0957
55

54

Calculations and result from the one way ANOVA statistical test

21

Kirsty Prendergrast
FdSc Marine Science

Average preferred prey size in regards to mantle size of Sepia officinalis

Avergare preferred prey size

100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%

Mantle length

Figure 13: A graph showing the average preferred prey size, for
each of Sepia officinalis mantle lengths, used in this investigation.

Discussion
22

Kirsty Prendergrast
FdSc Marine Science

After examining the results from the trial, and before any statistical tests were carried
out, it could be seen that there was a preferred prey size, depending on the length of
mantle, which Sepia officinalis was feeding upon. It was shown in the data that the
most common prey size, depended on which size mantle the Sepia officinalis had. In
the data which was collected it showed that the larger mantle length, feed on large
prey and did not feed on the small prey, whereas small mantle lengths fed on small
prey and did not feed on prey larger them themselves. Although the data which was
collected indicated that they had preferred prey size, the data was then used in an
ANOVA statistical test, to determine if there was an overall statistically significant
difference in the all of the results. The results from the statistical test (table 6),
indicated that there was a statistically significant difference, which was due to the Pvalue being smaller than zero point zero five. Due to there being a statistically
significant difference, this meant that a post hoc statistical test should be carried out.
However a post hoc test could not be carried out, as the data which was collected
had an irregular count. Which means that it could not be worked out, where the
statistically significant differences occurred in the data set. From the data which was
collected, the average preferred prey size, for each of the mantle length tested was
then calculated. These average were then shown in graphical form (figure 13).
Results from that the ANOVA statistical test indicated that there was a statistically
significant difference, which in turn indicated that Sepia officinalis do have a
preferred prey size, which depends on their length. This proves the hypotheses
which was being tested in this investigation, and has determined that the length of
Sepia officinalis, influences on the prey size which they will feed upon.
Research which has been carried out, examining the stomach content of Sepia
officinalis, has noted that there is a relationship between the size of Sepia officinalis
23

Kirsty Prendergrast
FdSc Marine Science

and the size of the prey which they fed upon (Castro and Guerra, 1989; BLANC, DU
SEL and DAGUZAN, 1998; Alves et al., 2006; Neves et al., 2009; Evans, 2012). In
the research which had been carried out by Castro and Guerra (1989), it stated that
a possible reason for this was as Sepia officinalis grow, the size of prey which they
fed upon changes, this could be because of Sepia officinalis behaviour, as an energy
maximizing forager. If this is in fact true, the reason the Sepia officinalis preferred
prey size increases as they grow in size, this could relate back to the fact that
Cephalpoda are known to require large amounts of food, due to their short life span
(Alves et al., 2006). Research carried out by Blanc and Daguzan, (2000), has stated
that adult Sepia officinalis are selective in they prey size which the feed upon,
whereas young Sepia officinalis are less selective with the prey size. Also that
Cephalopods are opportunistic in the choice of prey which they fed upon, and are
selective with the size of prey (Blanc and Daguzan, 2000).

Conclusion

24

Kirsty Prendergrast
FdSc Marine Science

After carrying out this investigation, it is possible to determine that Sepia officinalis
do in fact have a preferred prey size, which changes depending on the length of the
mantle. Key finding from carrying out this investigation and analysing of results,
conclude that Sepia officinalis do not feed upon prey that are large than themselves.
The larger the mantle size, the larger the prey the Sepia officinalis feed upon,
however Sepia officinalis which have a large prey mantle size only feed on large and
do not feed on small prey. As the mantle lengths increase with age, the size of the
prey also increases, and it is possible to work out the preferred prey size for any
mantle length, as the average preferred prey size of Sepia officinalis is 60.3 percent
of the total mantle length for that given Sepia officinalis.
It is possible to calculate an average preferred prey size for different sized Sepia
officinalis. However Cephalopoda are known to be opportunistic when it comes to
prey, but other research has concluded that Sepia officinalis are in fact more
selective to the size of prey, which they feed upon. This could be due to the fact that
Sepia officinalis have a high growth rate, which can be between three to ten percent
of their body weight per day. Sepia officinalis have a short life cycle and because of
having a high growth rate, this means that Sepia officinalis have a high food
requirement (Blanc and Daguzan, 2000). This could be the reason behind why Sepia
officinalis are more selective with the size of prey which they feed upon.
The fact that the publics interest in Sepia officinalis has grown over recent years
(Wood, 1998a), as well as the uses of Sepia officinalis and other species of cuttlefish
within aquaculture (Sykes, Gonalves and Andrade, 2013). The investigation and
research which has been carried out, is helpful in both aquaculture and aquarium
husbandry, as this investigation has determined and concluded that Sepia officinalis
have a preferred prey size and this increases with the age and length of the mantle
25

Kirsty Prendergrast
FdSc Marine Science

size. With the average prey size that Sepia officinalis will fed upon being 60.3
percent, this can be used to calculate the amount to feed for a group of Sepia
officinalis, and it will also help to reduce the amount of food which will go to waste.
This calculation can be used for both frozen and live food sources, shrimp and
prawn, however it would not work on crab and other food sources which can be used
as a food source for the Sepia officinalis. This investigation is important because it
has increased our understanding of the feeding habitats of Sepia officinalis and this
research can be used in both the aquaculture industry and aquarium industry.
This investigation has increased the understanding and feeding habitats of Sepia
officinalis. In other research which has looked at the preferred prey of Sepia
officinalis all have stated and noted that there was a link between the size of Sepia
officinalis and the size of the prey which they feed upon, but have only stated this
link. The research and results from this investigation has determined that there is a
statistically significant difference in the mantle lengths of Sepia officinalis and the
size of prey which their preferred to feed upon. With statistical test, it was possible to
calculate that the average prey size which Sepia officinalis preferred to feed upon,
was is 60.3 percent of their mantle length. This percentage can be used in aquarium,
aquaculture and other investigations, as it will help to reduce waste, and would have
an effect on the water quality with in Sepia officinalis tank.

Recommendations

26

Kirsty Prendergrast
FdSc Marine Science

After carrying out this investigation, it is clear that there are areas where this
investigation could be improved and where further research could be carried out.
It was made clear that before carrying out this investigation, there was a risk of
Sepia officinalis dying before the investigation could be completed, and this would
mean that this investigation would be unable to go ahead. Unfortunately in the
months and days leading up to this investigation being carried out, we lost four
Sepia officinalis, three where eaten by other Sepia officinalis in the tank and one
passed away the day before the investigation was carried out. Due to the deaths this
reduced the number of specimens which could be used in the investigation. Another
factor which had an influence on the results collected, was that the investigation only
ran over a period of two days, which again further reduced the amount of data able
to be collected.
Because of the reduction in the amount of data able to be collected in this
investigation, if this investigation was carried out again, it would be recommended
that there was a larger group of Sepia officinalis available to be used in the trial. This
means that a larger range of data would be collected also. If this investigation was
run over a longer period of time, this would also increase the data set and would
mean that it could be possible to test the preferred prey size the of specimens used
in the investigation, throughout their life cycle to verify if the theory within paper
written by Blanc and Daguzan, (2000) is true.
When carrying out the statistical test on the result from Falmouth Marine School and
the other institutes, the ANOVA statistical test showed that there was a statistically
significant difference in the data, which meant that a post hoc statistical test wold
need to be carried out, to determine where the statistical difference was in the data

27

Kirsty Prendergrast
FdSc Marine Science

set. However this data set could not be carried out, as the post hoc test required a
constant count, which this data set did not have, which meant that it was not possible
to locate where the statistically significant difference was in the data. It would be
recommended that if this investigation was to be carried out again, with the same
statistically tests being used, then it should be noted that post hoc test should be
used on the data to calculate where the statistically significant difference was in the
data, this would mean that the data which is being collected should be constant so
that the test could take place.
Following the concision from this investigation, further research in the preferred prey
size can be carried out, especially looking into the preferred prey size of juvenile and
adult Sepia officinalis, as well as over the life cycle to Sepia officinalis to determine if
and when there is any change in the preferred prey size of Sepia officinalis. This
future research with these results will mean that there is a greater understanding of
the feeding habits of Sepia officinalis, which could benefit the aquaculture and
aquarium industry.

28

Kirsty Prendergrast
FdSc Marine Science

Acknowledgement
I wish to thank my supervisor Craig Baldwin of Falmouth Marine School, for helping
look after the Cuttlefish, when I was unable to. As well for his help in regards to
coming up with the idea and the reasons behind the under taking of this
investigation. I also wish to thank Rob Daniels, Sam Dowling and Hector Lindars, for
there help with caring for the cuttlefish, the maintenance of the tank, and helping
when the cuttlefish had to be moved into a new tank. I must express my thanks to
National Marine Aquarium Plymouth and Merlin in Weymouth, for assisting with this
investigation, by supplying me with extra results. I must also express my thanks to
the Blue Reef Aquarium for supplying Falmouth Marine School with the Sepia
officinalis which were used in this investigation.
I would like to say a massive thank you to my parents, Su and Roy Prendergrast, for
their support during this investigation, reading copies of this report, supporting me
through my time at Falmouth Marine School and giving me the encouragement along
the way, always telling me to follow my dreams. I would also like to say a big thank
you to Pete Lewis, for read a copy of this report. I would also to say a massive thank
you to all of my Friends for supporting me, especial when I was in need in help. I
would especial like to thank my best friend, Jack Edwards for supporting me and
encouraging me along the way.
This investigation was asked to be carried out by the National Marine Aquarium in
Plymouth.

29

Kirsty Prendergrast
FdSc Marine Science

References
Figure 1
Prendergrast, K. (2014). Sepia officinalis. [Photograph] Falmouth.
Figure 2
Prendergrast, K. (2015). Cuttlefish 1. [Photography] Falmouth.
Figure 3
Prendergrast, K. (2015). Cuttlefish 2. [Photography] Falmouth.
Figure 4
Prendergrast, K. (2015). Cuttlefish 3. [Photography] Falmouth.
Figure 5
Prendergrast, K. (2015). Cuttlefish 4. [Photography] Falmouth.
Figure 6
Prendergrast, K. (2015). Cuttlefish 5. [Photography] Falmouth.
Figure 7
Prendergrast, K. (2015). Cuttlefish 6. [Photography] Falmouth.
Figure 8
Prendergrast, K. (2015). Cuttlefish 7. [Photography] Falmouth.
Figure 9
Prendergrast, K. (2015). Cuttlefish 8. [Photography] Falmouth.
Figure 10
30

Kirsty Prendergrast
FdSc Marine Science

Prendergrast, K. (2015). Mantle length of Sepia officinalis. [Pencil] Falmouth.

Figure 11
Prendergrast, K. (2015). Sepia officinalis tank. [Pencil] Falmouth.
Figure 12
Prendegrast, K. (2015). King Prawn measurement. [Pencil] Falmouth.
Alves et al., 2006
Alves, D., Cristo, M., Sendo, J. and Borges, T. (2006). Diet of the cuttlefish Sepia
officinalis (Cephalopoda: Sepiidae) off the south coast of Portugal (eastern Algarve).
J. Mar. Biol. Ass., 86(02), p.429.
Barnes, Calow and Olive, 1993
Barnes, R., Calow, P. and Olive, P. (1993). The invertebrates. 2nd ed. Oxford
[England]: Blackwell Scientific, p.135.
BLANC, DU SEL and DAGUZAN, 1998
BLANC, A., DU SEL, G. and DAGUZAN, J. (1998). HABITAT AND DIET OF EARLY
STAGES OF SEPIA OFFICINALIS L. (CEPHALOPODA) IN MORBIHAN BAY,
FRANCE. Journal of Molluscan Studies, 64(3), pp.263-274.
Blanc and Daguzan, 2000
Blanc, A. and Daguzan, J. (2000). Size selectivity in the diet of the young cuttlefish
Sepia officinalis (Mollusca: Sepiidae). J. Mar. Biol. Ass., 80(6), pp.1137-1138.
Castro and Guerra, 1989

31

Kirsty Prendergrast
FdSc Marine Science

Castro, B. and Guerra, A. (1989). Feeding Pattern of Sepia Officinalis (Cephalopoda:

Sepiodidea) In The Ria De Vigo (Nw Spain). J. Mar. Biol. Ass., 69(03), p.545.
Compton and Wiley, 2011
Compton, A. and Wiley, L. (2011). Sepia officinalis. [online] Animal Diversity Web.
Available at: http://animaldiversity.org/accounts/Sepia_officinalis/#food_habits
[Accessed 1 Apr. 2015].
Darmaillacq et al., 2004
Darmaillacq, A., Dickel, L., Chichery, M., Agin, V. and Chichery, R. (2004). Rapid
taste aversion learning in adult cuttlefish, Sepia officinalis. Animal Behaviour, 68(6),
pp.1291-1298.
Domingues, Bettencourt and Guerra, 2006
Domingues, P., Bettencourt, V. and Guerra, A. (2006). Growth of Sepia officinalis in
captivity and in nature. Life and environment, 56(2), pp.109-120.
Evans, 2012
Evans, H. (2012). The diet of the juvenile cuttlefish Sepia officinalis (Cephalopoda:
Sepiidae) in the English Channel. Journal of the Marine biological association, p.1.
Hanley et al., 1998
Hanley, J., Shashar, N., Smolowitz, R., Bullis, R., Mebane, W., Gabr, H. and Hanlon,
R. (1998). Modified Laboratory Culture Techniques for the European Cuttlefish Sepia
officinalis. Biological Bulletin, 195(2), p.223.
Jones and McCarthy, 2013

32

Kirsty Prendergrast
FdSc Marine Science

Jones, N. and McCarthy, I. (2013). Aquaculture rearing techniques for the common
cuttlefish Sepia officinalis & the Atlantic bobtail squid Sepiola atlantica. 1st ed.
[ebook] Anglesey: Seafare, p.23. Available at:
http://www.seafareproject.eu/files/1414/1769/0344/ceph_manual_final.pdf [Accessed
30 Mar. 2015].
Kirkwood and Hubrecht, 2010
Kirkwood, J. and Hubrecht, R. (2010). The UFAW handbook on the care and
management of laboratory animals and other research animals. Oxford: WileyBlackwell, a John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., Publication, p.790.
Lund Research Ltd, 2013
Lund Research Ltd, (2013). One-way ANOVA - An introduction to when you should
run this test and the test hypothesis | Laerd Statistics. [online] Statistics.laerd.com.
Available at: https://statistics.laerd.com/statistical-guides/one-way-anova-statisticalguide.php [Accessed 3 Apr. 2015].
Neves et al., 2009
Neves, A., Sequeira, V., Vieira, A., Paiva, R. and Gordo, L. (2009). Feeding habits of
the cuttlefish Sepia officinalis during its life cycle in the Sado estuary (Portugal).
Hydrobiologia, 636(1), pp.479-488.
Slater and Buttling, 2011
Slater, M. and Buttling, O. (2011). Giant Pacific Octopus Husbandry Manual. 1st ed.
[ebook] London: British and Irish Association for Zoos and Aquariums, pp.20-21.
Available at: http://www.thecephalopodpage.org/_pdf/Giant%20Pacific%20Octopus
%20husbandry%20BIAZA.pdf [Accessed 30 Mar. 2015].
33

Kirsty Prendergrast
FdSc Marine Science

Sykes, Gonalves and Andrade, 2013

Sykes, A., Gonalves, R. and Andrade, J. (2013). Early weaning of cuttlefish ( Sepia
officinalis , L.) with frozen grass shrimp ( Palaemonetes varians ) from the first day
after hatching. Aquac Res, 44(12), pp.1815-1823.
Wood, 1998a
Wood, J. (1998). Cuttlefish Husbandry: Part I - What is a Cuttlefish anyway? - The
Cephalopod Page. [online] Thecephalopodpage.org. Available at:
http://www.thecephalopodpage.org/cuttle1.php [Accessed 1 Apr. 2015].
Wood, 1998b
Wood, J. (1998). Cuttlefish Husbandry: Part III - How do I keep a cuttlefish? - The
Cephalopod Page. [online] Thecephalopodpage.org. Available at:
http://www.thecephalopodpage.org/cuttle3.php [Accessed 30 Mar. 2015].
Wheeler and Fautin, 2001
Wheeler, K. and Fautin, D. (2001). Cephalopoda. [online] Animal Diversity Web.
Available at: http://animaldiversity.org/accounts/Cephalopoda/ [Accessed 1 Apr.
2015].

Appendices
Risk assessment
34

Kirsty Prendergrast
FdSc Marine Science

The risk assessment below in table 7, is an assessment of all the risk which could
occur during this investigation. This assessment has been filled out to take into
account the nature of the investigation as well as, specimens which will be used in
the investigation.
Table 7 Risk assessment
Activity: The feeding of Sepia

Location: Laboratory at Falmouth

officinalis, and laboratory work

Hazard and
Who is at risk

Marine School
How is that risk

harm

Are additional

going to be

control

controlled

methods need
(Y or N)

Injury to the back

The individuals/

Ensure that there will

due to the lifting/

individual carrying/

be enough to help,

carrying of a

lifting the tank.

with carrying the tank.

tank.

When lifting the tank,

the tank is lifted in the
correct manor to
reduce the risk in
injure (lift with the

Tripping over

The individuals/

knees, not the back)

Ensure that the route

whilst carrying

individual carrying

is clear of obstacles

the tank.

the tank.

which could be a

tripping hazard, as well

as having extra
individuals to go ahead
35

Kirsty Prendergrast
FdSc Marine Science

of the tank, to help

guide and remove any
obstructions which
Opening doors

The individuals/

could be a trip hazard.

Wedge any doors

whilst carrying a

individual carrying

open if possible,

tank.

the tank.

before beginning the

journey. If this is not

possible have extra
individuals to hold
doors open whilst
carrying the tank
Dropping the

The individuals/

through.
Before starting the

tank.

individual carrying

journey, lift the tank

the tank, as well as slightly off the surface

individuals in the

to determine whether

area which are

is possible to carry the

unaware of what is

tank if not extra help

Cutting foot due

happening.
The individuals/

will be required.
Ensure shoes are worn N

to broken glass

individual carrying

which have a solid sole

on the ground,

the tank, as well as and if there is any

from dropping the

individuals in the

glass on the floor

tank.

area which are

ensure that it is

unaware of what

cleaned straight away,

has happened.

and all the glass has

36

Kirsty Prendergrast
FdSc Marine Science

been removed of the

floor.
Ensure that when

Cutting finger on

The individuals/

broken glass,

individuals carrying cleaning up glass it is

from dropping the

the tank as well

done safely, and there

tank.

individuals in the

is no glass left on the

area which are

floor. Cover edges

unaware of what is

where the glass is

happening, and

broken to reduce the

individuals working

risk of being cut.

on the tank.
Dropping the tank The individuals/

Ensure that proper foot

onto someones

individual carrying

wear is worn (steel

foot, or on your

the tank, as well as toed boots/ shoes) to

own foot

individuals in the

reduce the risk of

area unaware of

damage to foot/ toes. If

what is happening.

possible transport the

tank on a trolley all the

way to its new resting
place avoiding risk of
Getting

The individuals/

dropping.
Pay attention, making

chemicals on skin individual who are

sure that gloves and

and in eyes,

safety googles are

cleaning the tank.

whilst cleaning

worn whilst cleaning,

the tank.

to minimise the risk.

Hands should be
37

Kirsty Prendergrast
FdSc Marine Science

thoroughly washed
after using any
Chemical burns.

The individuals/

hazardous chemicals.
Pay attention to what

individual who are

you are doing, make

working with

sure that you are

chemicals.

wearing suitable

protective clothing
when dealing with
chemicals. If chemical
burns do occur seek
medical attention
Water which has

The individuals/

straight away.
Pay attention whilst

been spilt on the

individuals

moving/ pouring water

floor causing a

cleaning the tank,

into the tank. Shoes

slip hazard.

carrying out a

should be worn which

water change, as

have a good grip to

well as individuals

reduce the risk of

in the area.

slipping. If any water

has been split on the

floor should be
cleaned up straight
way, and wet floor sign
should be in place as
well until the floor is

38

Kirsty Prendergrast
FdSc Marine Science

The rupturing of

The individuals/

dry.
Dont use tanks which

the tank, causing

individuals working

have any cracks or

flood, and

on the tank, as

floors in them, to

slipping hazard.

well as individuals

reduce the risk of a

in the area.

ruptured tank. If the

tank does rupture use

a mop and bucket to
mop up as much water
as possible, and place
a wet floor sign in the
Water split on

The individuals/

area as well.
Pay attention when

electrical

individuals working

pouring/ moving water,

equipment.

in the areas.

make sure that there

are no live electrical

equipment or cables in
Tripping over

The individuals/

the area.
Pay attention to where

electrical cable.

individuals in the

you are walking. Make

areas.

sure that the cable is

secured to floor or
covered with suitable
bridge to reduce the
Tripping over

The individuals/

tripping hazard.
Pay attention to where

hose pipe.

individual in the

you are walking, if

39

Kirsty Prendergrast
FdSc Marine Science

area.

possible make sure

that there are no hose
pipes laying on the
floor to reduce the

Falling off ladder/

The individual who

tripping hazard.
Pay attention to what

stool whilst filling

was up the ladder/

are you are doing, do

a tank.

stool.

not over reach, and

make sure that there is

someone holding the
ladder / stool at the
bottom so that it is
Ingestion of

The individuals/

secure.
Pay attention to what

marine salt.

individual working

are you are doing,

with the marine

make sure that you

salt.

wash your hands

thoroughly after using

Marine salt in the

The individuals/

the marine salt.

Pay attention to what

eye.

individual working

are you doing, make

with the marine

sure that you do not

salt.

rub your eyes and

wear eye protection

when you have got salt
Dropping a tube

The individual

on your hands.
Pay attention to what

40

Kirsty Prendergrast
FdSc Marine Science

of marine salt on

carrying the tube

you are doing, if you

to foot.

of salt.

are unable to carry the

tube on your own
require extra help with
carrying the salt tube.
Make sure that proper
shoes are worn (steel
toed boots/ shoes) to
reduce the risk of

Dropping bag

The individuals/

injure.
Pay attention to what

with Sepia

individual carrying

you are doing, make

officinalis on the

the Sepia

sure that you carry the

floor causing the

officinalis, as well

bag with two hands

bag to rupture,

as individuals in

(one on the top of the

whilst causes a

the area unaware

bag the other

slip hazard.

of what has

underneath the bag). If

happened.

the bag does rupture,

clean up all water

straight away and
place a wet floor sign
Getting bitten by

The individuals/

on the floor until dry.

Pay attention to what

Sepia officinalis.

individuals working

you are doing, if you

with the Sepia

do place your hand in

officinalis.

the tank, making sure

41

Kirsty Prendergrast
FdSc Marine Science

that you do not make

any fast movements,
or threatening
movements. Wear
suitable gloves.
Pay attention when

Ingestion of the

The individual/

water testing

individuals carrying carrying out the water

chemicals.

out the water tests.

test, making sure that

you follow the
instructions and wear
protective googles and
gloves when carrying
out these tests. Wash
your hands thoroughly
after carrying out each
water test.
Pay attention to what

Spilt chemicals

The individuals/

on the floor,

individuals carrying you are doing, and if

causing a slip

out the water test,

any chemical are spilt

hazard.

as well individuals

on the floor make sure

in the area which

that it is cleaned up

are unaware of

properly and straight

what has

away. Place a wet floor

happened.

sign in the areas until

dry as well, to reduce

injures to other

42

Kirsty Prendergrast
FdSc Marine Science

Sepia officinalis

The individuals/

individuals.
Clean up the ink

ink on the floor,

individual working

straight away, and

causing a slip

with Sepia

place a wet floor sign

hazard.

officinalis, as well

in the areas until dry to

as individuals

reduce risk of injury to

unaware of what

other individuals.

Sepia officinalis

has happened.
The individuals/

Pay attention to what

ink in the eye.

individual working

you are doing, making

with Sepia

sure that you have

officinalis.

washed your hands

once you have

handled ink from
Sepia officinalis. Wear
Allergic reaction

The individuals/

eye projection.
Wash the affected area N

to Sepia

individual who is

straight away and seek

officinalis ink

working with Sepia

medical attention

contact.
Allergic reaction

officinalis.
The individuals/

straight way also.

Wash the affected area N

to contact with

individuals

straight away and seek

shell fish.

handling the shell

medical attention

Cutting fingers,

fish.
The individuals/

straight away also.

Pay attention to what

whilst cutting the

individual which

you are doing and if

prawns.

are cutting the

you do cut yourself,

prawns.

wear suitable gloves

43

Kirsty Prendergrast
FdSc Marine Science

wash the affected

areas, and seek
Ingestion of raw

The individuals/

medical attention.
Pay attention to what

prawns.

individuals dealing

you are doing, making

with raw prawns.

sure that you

thoroughly wash your

hands after handling
Dropping prawns

The individuals/

raw prawns.
Pay attention to what

on the floor,

individual carrying

you are doing. If you

causing a slip

the prawns, as well do drop prawns on the

hazard.

as individuals in

floor, make sure that

the area which are

you clean it up straight

unaware of what

away to reduce the risk

has happened.

of injury to other

individuals. Also place

at wet floor sign in the
Ingestion of

The individual

area until dry.

Pay attention to what

contaminated

setting of the

you are doing, making

water.

syphon, as well as

sure that when you do

individuals/

start the syphon off the

individual dealing

water that you do not

with contaminated

shallow any of the

water.

contaminated water.

Wash your hands

44

Kirsty Prendergrast
FdSc Marine Science

thoroughly after
dealing with
Electrical fire.

The individuals/

contaminated water.
Make sure that all the

individual in the

electrical equipment

area.

used is PAT tested,

and that any damaged

electrical cables are no
Electrocution,

The individuals/

longer being used.

When dealing with

individual in the

electrical items, make

area.

sure that your hands

are dry and were

possible the items are
turned off (isolated).

45

Kirsty Prendergrast
FdSc Marine Science

Preferred prey size

120
100
80
0.5cmof specimens
1cm
Number

602cm

3cm

5cm

6cm

7cm

40
20
0

1cm 2cm 3cm 4cm 5cm 6cm 7cm 8cm 9cm 10cm
Mantle Length

Extra graphs

Figure 14: A graph showing all the data which had been collected from the
investigation before being used in ANOVA statistically tests.

46

Kirsty Prendergrast
FdSc Marine Science

1cm
2cm
3cm
4cm
5cm
6cm
7cm
8cm
9cm
10cm

50%
50%
66%
50%
50%
50%
86%
75%
66%
60%

Calculations
Overall average preferred prey size of Sepia officinalis:
Table 8 Data used to calculate an overall average preferred prey size.

50+50+66+50+50+50+86+75+66+60=603
60310= 60.3 %

47