Preys and capture sites used by crab spiders (Araneae: Thomisidae and Philodromidae) in a grassland of central Argentina
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.25260/EA.15.25.1.0.49Abstract
Ecología Austral, 25:19-25 (2015)
Distribution of predators and flowers influence on the selection of forage site of flower visitors. Predators, as crab spiders, can determine the structure of communities of flower visitors and influence on plant pollination. The objectives of this study were: (a) to evaluate the use of flowers or inflorescences (hereinafter units floral attraction, UFA) by crab spiders as capture sites; (B) to identify traits that may affect the use of capture sites; and (c) to assess the relationship between the size of the spiders and their prey. We surveyed two plots of one hectare in center of Pampas region (Buenos Aires, Argentina) recording all entomophilous flowering plants and their floral visitors. In addition, we captured all crab spiders with and without preys, recording the UFA they used as capture site. We estimate and evaluate the relationship between the size of the spiders and their prey. Crab spiders used as capture sites the most abundant UFA and with higher richness of floral visitors, regardless of whether they were flowers or inflorescences. On the other hand, the size of the spider could be determining the size of the preys. We found a positive association between the two variables, although this result was variable depending on the taxonomic orders of preys. Those results suggest that crab spiders can have a relevant role as modelers of the structure of plant - pollinator interaction.
References
ARNQVIST, G & S HENRIKSSON. 1997. Sexual cannibalism in the fishing spider and a model for the evolution of sexual cannibalism based on genetic constraints. Evol Ecol, 11:255-273.
BHASKARA, MR; CM BRIJESH; S AHMED & RM BORGES. 2009. Perception of ultraviolet light by crab spiders and its role in selection of hunting sites. J Comp Physiol, 195:409-417.
BRECHBÜHL, R; C KROPF & S BACHER. 2010a. Impact of flower-dwelling crab spiders on plant-pollinator mutualisms. Basic Appl Ecol, 11:76-82.
BRECHBÜHL, R; J CASAS & S BACHER. 2010b. Ineffective crypsis in a crab spider: a prey community perspective. P R Soc B, 277:739-746.
BRECHBÜHL, R; J CASAS & S BACHER. 2011. Diet choice of a predator in the wild: overabundance of prey and missed opportunities along the prey capture sequence. Ecosphere, 2:133.
CHELI, G; A ARMENDANO & A GONZÁLEZ. 2006. Preferencia alimentaria de arañas Misumenops pallidus (Araneae: Thomisidae) sobre potenciales insectos presa de cultivos de alfalfa. Rev Biol Trop, 54: 505-513.
CHIEN, SA & DH MORSE. 1998. The role of prey and flower quality in the choice of hunting sites by adult male crab spiders Misumena vatia (Araneae, Thomisidae). J Arachnol, 26:238-243.
CHITTKA, L. 2001. Camouflage of predatory crab spiders on flowers and the colour perception of bees (Aranida: Thomisidae/Hymenoptera: Apidae). Entomol Gen, 25 (3): 181-187.
DEFRIZE, J; M THÉRY & J CASAS. 2010. Background colour matching by a crab spider in the field: a community sensory ecology perspective. J Exp Biol, 213:1425-1435.
DI RIENZO, JA; F CASANOVES; MG BALZARINI; L GONZALEZ; M TABLADA & CW ROBLEDO. 2008. InfoStat, versión 2008, Grupo InfoStat, FCA, Universidad Nacional de Córdoba, Córdoba.
DUKAS, R & DH MORSE. 2003. Crab spiders affect flower visitation by bees. Oikos, 101:157-163.
DUKAS, R & DH MORSE. 2005. Crab spiders show mixed effects on flower-visiting bees and no effect on plant fitness components. EcoScience, 12:244-247.
DUKAS, R. 2005. Bumble bee predators reduce pollinator density and plant fitness. Ecology, 86:1401-1406.
FOELIX, R. 2011. Biology of spiders. Third edition. Oxford, RU: Oxford University Press. 419 pp.
GONÇALVES-SOUZA, T; PM OMENA; JC SOUZA & GQ ROMERO. 2008. Trait-mediated effects on flowers: artificial spiders deceive pollinators and decrease plant fitness. Ecology, 89:2407-2413.
GONZÁLEZ, A; G LILJESTHRÖM; E MINERVINO; D CASTRO; S GONZÁLEZ & A ARMENDANO. 2009. Predation by Misumenops pallidus (Araneae: Thomisidae) on insect pests of soybean cultures of Buenos Aires Province, Argentina. J Arachnol, 37:282-286.
HANNA, CJ & PK EASON. 2013. Juvenile crab spiders (Mecaphesa asperata) use indirect cues to choose foraging sites. Ethol Ecol Evol, 25:161-173.
HEILING, AM; ME HERBERSTEIN & L CHITTKA. 2003. Crab-spiders manipulate flower signals. Nature, 421: 334.
HEILING, AM; K CHENG & ME HERBERSTEIN. 2004. Exploitation of floral signals by crab spiders (Thomisus spectabilis, Thomisidae). Behav Ecol, 15:321-326.
HEILING, AM; K CHENG; L CHITTKA; A GOETH & ME HERBERSTEIN. 2005. The role of UV in crab spider signals: effects on perception by prey and predators. J Exp Biol, 208:3925-3931.
LEGRAND, RS & DH MORSE. 2000. Factors driving extreme sexual size dimorphism of a sit-and-wait predator under low density. Biol J Linn Soc, 71:643-664.
LLANDRES, AL; FM GAWRYSZEWSKI; AM HEILING & ME HERBERSTEIN. 2011. The effect of colour variation in predators on the behaviour of pollinators: Australian crab spiders and native bees. Ecol Entomol, 36:72-81.
LLANDRES, AL; E DE MAS & MA RODRÍGUEZ-GIRONÉS. 2012. Response of pollinators to the trade-off between resource acquisition and predator avoidance. Oikos 121:687-696.
MARRERO, HJ; JP TORRETTA & G POMPOZZI. 2013. Triple interaction network among flowers, flower visitors and crab spiders in a grassland ecosystem. Stud Neotrop Fauna E, 48:153-164.
MARRERO, HJ; JP TORRETTA & D MEDAN. 2014. Effect of land use intensification on specialization in plant-floral visitor interaction networks in the Pampas of Argentina. Agr Ecosyst Environ, 188:63-71.
MORSE, DH. 1984. How crab spiders (Araneae: Thomisidae) hunt at flowers. J Arachnol, 12, 307-316.
MORSE, DH. 2000. Flower choice by naïve young crab spiders and the effect of subsequent experience. Anim Behav, 59:943-951.
MORSE, DH. 2006. Fine-scale substrate use by a small sit-and-wait predator. Behav Ecol, 17:405-409.
MORSE, DH. 2007. Predator upon a flower: life history and fitness in a crab spider. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. 377 pp.
SAUVE, AMC; C FONTAINE & E THÉBAULT. 2013. Structure–stability relationships in networks combining mutualistic and antagonistic interactions. Oikos, 123: 378-384.
TADEY, M; R AYAZO; F CARRASCO-RUEDA; Y CHRISTOPHER; M DOMÍNGUEZ; G LA QUAY-VELÁZQUEZ & M SAN JOSÉ. 2013. Depredación de arañas hacia visitantes florales y herbívoros, balance entre mutualismo y antagonismo. Ecología Austral 23:126-134.
TAN, K; Z HU; W CHEN; Z WANG; Y WANG & JC NIEH. 2013. Fearful foragers: honey bees tune colony and individual foraging to multi-predator presence and food quality. PLoS ONE 8: e75841.
TOGNETTI, PM; EJ CHANETON; M OMACINI; HJ TREBINO & RJC LEÓN. 2010. Exotic vs. native plant dominance over 20 years of old-field succession on set-aside farmland in Argentina. Biol Conserv, 143: 2494-2503.
UETZ, G. 1992. Foraging strategies of spiders. Trends Ecol Evol, 7:155-159.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2015 Hugo Javier Marrero, Gabriel Pompozzi, Juan Pablo Torretta
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.
Authors retain their rights as follows: 1) by granting the journal the right to its first publication, and 2) by registering the published article with a Creative Commons Attribution License (CC-BY 4.0), which allows authors and third parties to view and use it as long as they clearly mention its origin (citation or reference, including authorship and first publication in this journal). Authors can make other non-exclusive distribution agreements as long as they clearly indicate their origin and are encouraged to widely share and disseminate the published version of their work.
