Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | 26 November 2025 | 17(11): 28001–28003

 

ISSN 0974-7907 (Online) | ISSN 0974-7893 (Print) 

https://doi.org/10.11609/jott.10001.17.11.28001-28003  

#10001 | Received 16 June 2025 | Finally accepted 27 October 2025

 

 

Crab eating crab: first record of the Horn-eyed Ghost Crab Ocypode brevicornis preying on the Mottled Light-footed Crab Grapsus albolineatus in Visakhapatnam, India

 

Harish Prakash 1, M.K. Abhisree 2  & Rohan Kumar 3

 

1,2,3 Department of Life Sciences, GITAM School of Science, GITAM (Deemed to be University), Visakhapatnam, Andhra Pradesh,  India.

1 harishprakashhp@gmail.com (corresponding author), 2 abhisreemk@gmail.com, 3 rk070088@gmail.com

 

 

 

Editor: Hari Praved, Cochin University of Science and Technology, Kerala, India.   Date of publication: 26 November 2025 (online & print)

 

Citation: Prakash, H., M.K. Abhisree & R. Kumar (2025). Crab eating crab: first record of the Horn-eyed Ghost Crab Ocypode brevicornis preying on the Mottled Light-footed Crab Grapsus albolineatus in Visakhapatnam, India. Journal of Threatened Taxa 17(11): 28001–28003. https://doi.org/10.11609/jott.10001.17.11.28001-28003

  

Copyright: © Prakash et al. 2025. Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. JoTT allows unrestricted use, reproduction, and distribution of this article in any medium by providing adequate credit to the author(s) and the source of publication.

 

Funding: GITAM : Research Seed Grants (RSG); Ref: F.No 2024/0320.

 

Competing interests: The authors declare no competing interests.

 

Acknowledgements: We would like to thank the Gandhi Institute of Technology and Management (GITAM), Deemed to be Univeristy, for the Research Seed Grant (2024/0320) that enabled us to kickstart exploring the intertidal zones. Also, I would like to thank UGC for the Abhisree M. K.’s JRF fellowship.

 

 

One of the classic studies by Paine (1966) demonstrated how the keystone predator, the Ochre Sea Star Pisaster ochraceus, regulates species composition and maintains diversity in rocky intertidal communities. Similarly, in sandy intertidal zones, ghost crabs (genus Ocypode, family Ocypodidae) act as important keystone predators by influencing benthic invertebrate populations and sediment dynamics, thereby shaping the ecological structure of these habitats. These sand burrowing crabs are called ‘ghosts’ for their pale sand blending colour, their swift movement to escape threat, and their predominant nocturnal activity (Lucrezi & Schlacher 2014). All ghost crabs are morphologically characterised by their box-shaped carapace, long eye stalk, and unequally sized claws. They are distributed all across the tropics and temperate zones, from the coast of the Atlantic Ocean and the Mediterranean Sea to the eastern Pacific Ocean and the Indo-west Pacific Ocean (Sakai & Türkay 2013). Along the Indian coast, there are at least six recorded species of ghost crabs – O. brevicornis, O. ceratophthalmus, O. cordimana, O. macrocera, O. pallidula, and O. rotundata (Sakai & Türkay 2013; Lucrezi & Schlacher 2014). Of the six, we have observed at least three species in Rushikonda Beach, Visakhapatnam – O. brevicornis (Image 1), O. macrocera, and O. cordimanus.

Ghost crabs play a key role in the intertidal ecosystem. The burrowing activity of crabs on the sandy shores causes bioturbation, mixing sediments and thereby influencing nutrient cycling and overall ecosystem functioning (Dubey et al. 2013; An et al. 2021). Moreover, ghost crabs serve as a key link in intertidal food webs, functioning as apex invertebrate consumers and scavengers while also serving as prey for vertebrates. Their diet ranges from the microscopic organic materials, to macroscopic dendrites of seaweeds and seagrass, animal carcasses beached on the shore, and live invertebrate & vertebrate prey that the crabs can catch and handle (Lucrezi & Schlacher 2014; Vale et al. 2022). Initially, assumed to be predominantly scavengers, there is increasing evidence that ghost crabs are significant apex predators that hunt and feed in the intertidal zone (Wolcott 1978; Kwon et al. 2018; Yong & Lim 2019). They are known to actively prey on clams, gastropods, annelid worms, isopods, shrimps, various kinds of insects, and eggs & young ones of nesting birds and turtles (Lucrezi & Schlacher 2014). They are also known to prey on other crabs such as hermit crabs (family Paguroidea), mole crabs (Hippidae), fiddler crabs (Ocypodidae), box crabs (Calappidae), portunid crabs (Portunidae), sentinel crabs (Macrophthalmidae), and ghost crabs (Branco et al. 2010; Chartosia et al. 2010).

To the best of our knowledge, this is the first documented observation of the O. brevicornis actively handling a G. albolineatus (family: Grapsidae) (Image 3 & 4). This observation made at Rushikonda Beach, Visakhapatnam, on April 2025 is unique since the O. brevicornis is usually found only on the sandy section of the beach, while the G. albolineatus is found in the rocky section (Image 2). This natural history observation highlights the sand-dwelling ghost crabs’ possible foray into the rocky sections of the intertidal zone as a part of their nocturnal foraging activity. Such predator-prey interaction might be restricted to areas of the beach where rocky and sandy habitats co-occur within the intertidal zone.

Ghost crabs are generalists and opportunistic feeders, with their diet depends on local prey availability and seasonal variation (Vale et al. 2022). Given the wide geographical distribution of O. brevicornis along the Indian coast, dietary patterns likely vary spatially. Such differences in marine predator-prey interactions might also arise from the impact of disturbance to the intertidal ecosystem in the form of pollution (Johnston & Roberts 2009) and climate change (Harley 2011). Studies in the future, should systematically examine the diet of apex invertebrate predators like ghost crabs. Such studies will improve our understanding of predator-prey interactions and their spatio-temporal variation along the coast. It also helps infer the impact of such interactions on intertidal community dynamics and broader marine ecosystem functioning.

Ethical statement: This observation was based solely on animals in their natural habitat. No manipulation or disturbance was caused to them during the observation except for the brief headlamp light and flash from the camera. Therefore, no ethical approval was required.

For images - - click here for full PDF

 

References

 

An, Z., D. Gao, F. Chen, L. Wu, J. Zhou, Z. Zhang & Y. Zheng (2021). Crab bioturbation alters nitrogen cycling and promotes nitrous oxide emission in intertidal wetlands: Influence and microbial mechanism. Science of The Total Environment 797: 149176. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.149176

Branco, J.O., J.C. Hillesheim, H.A.A. Fracasso, M.L. Christoffersen & C.L. Evangelista (2010). Bioecology of the Ghost Crab Ocypode quadrata (Fabricius, 1787) (Crustacea: Brachyura) Compared with Other Intertidal Crabs in the Southwestern Atlantic. Journal of Shellfish Research 29(2): 503–512. https://doi.org/10.2983/035.029.0229

Chartosia, N., M.S. Kitsos, T. Tzomos, E. Mavromati & A. Koukouras (2010). Diet composition of five species of crabs (Decapoda, Brachyura) that show a gradual transition from marine to terrestrial life. Crustaceana 83(10): 1181–1197.

Dubey, S.K., D.C. Chakraborty, S. Chakraborty & A. Choudhury (2013). Burrow architecture of red ghost crab Ocypode macrocera (H. Milne-Edwards, 1852): a case study in Indian Sundarbans. Exploratory Animal and Medical Research 3(2): 136–144.

Harley, C.D.G. (2011). Climate Change, Keystone Predation, and Biodiversity Loss. Science 334(6059): 1124–1127. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1210199

Johnston, E.L. & D.A. Roberts (2009). Contaminants reduce the richness and evenness of marine communities: A review and meta-analysis. Environmental Pollution 157(6): 1745–1752. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2009.02.017

Kwon, E., J.D. Fraser, D.H. Catlin, S.M. Karpanty, C.E. Weithman & B. Muiznieks (2018). Presence of ghost crabs and piping plover nesting success. The Journal of Wildlife Management 82(4): 850–856. https://doi.org/10.1002/jwmg.21422

Lucrezi, S. & T.A. Schlacher (2014). The Ecology of Ghost Crabs pp. 201–256. In: Hughes, R.N., D.J. Hughes, & I.P. Smith (eds.). Oceanography and Marine Biology. CRC Press.

Paine, R.T. (1966). Food web complexity and species diversity. The American Naturalist 100(910): 65–75. http://www.jstor.org/stable/2459379

Sakai, K. & M. Türkay (2013). Revision of the genus Ocypode with the description of a new genus, Hoplocypode (Crustacea: Decapoda: Brachyura). Memoirs of the Queensland Museum – Nature 56(2): 665–793. https://doi.org/10.17082/j.2204-1478.56.2.2013-22

Vale, J.G. do, G.H.C. Barrilli, S. Chahad-Ehlers & J.O. Branco (2022). Factors influencing the feeding habits of the ghost crab Ocypode quadrata (Fabricius, 1787) on subtropical sandy beaches. Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science 269: 107817. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecss.2022.107817

Wolcott, T.G. (1978). Ecological role of ghost crabs, Ocypode quadrata (Fabricius) on an ocean beach: scavengers or predators? Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 31(1): 67–82.

Yong, A.Y.P. & S.S.L. Lim (2019). Quantitative methods for the determination of abundance of mobile prey of ghost crabs, Ocypode Weber, 1795 (Decapoda: Brachyura: Ocypodidae), a top predator on sandy shores. Journal of Crustacean Biology 39(4): 516–521. https://doi.org/10.1093/jcbiol/ruz022