Chemical cues influence retreat-site selection by flat rock spiders
In: BehaviourSearch for other papers by Scott Penfold in
Current site
Google Scholar
Search for other papers by Buddhi Dayananda in
Current site
Google Scholar
Search for other papers by Jonathan K. Webb in
Current site
Google Scholar
Many animals use chemical cues to detect conspecifics and predators. On sandstone outcrops, flat rock spiders Morebilus plagusius and Polyrachis ants use sun-exposed rocks as nest sites, and defend rocks from intruders. We investigated whether chemical cues influenced retreat-site selection by spiders. In the field, spiders showed significant avoidance of rocks used by ants. In laboratory trials, we gave spiders the choice between conspecific-scented and unscented refuges, and ant-scented and unscented refuges. In conspecific scent trials, spiders showed no avoidance of spider scented refuges during the night, but significantly more spiders chose unscented refuges as their diurnal retreat-site. In ant scent trials, spiders made more visits to unscented refuges than ant-scented refuges during the night, and significantly more spiders chose unscented refuges as their diurnal retreat site. Our results demonstrate that spiders can detect chemical cues from ants and conspecifics, and that such cues influence retreat-site selection.
Purchase
Buy instant access (PDF download and unlimited online access):
Institutional Login
Log in with Open Athens, Shibboleth, or your institutional credentials
Personal login
Log in with your brill.com account
-
Allan R.A., Elgar M.A., Capon R.J. (1996). Exploitation of an ant chemical alarm signal by the zodariid spider Habronestes bradleyi Walckenaer. — Proc. Roy. Soc. Lond. B: Biol. Sci. 263: 69-73.
-
Andersen A.N. (1991). The ants of southern Australia: a guide to the Bassian fauna. — CSIRO, Melbourne, VIC.
-
Angelon K.A., Petranka J.W. (2002). Chemicals of predatory mosquitofish (Gambusia affinis) influence selection of oviposition site by Culex mosquitoes. — J. Chem. Ecol. 28: 797-806.
-
Barnes M.C., Persons M.H., Rypstra A.L. (2002). The effect of predator chemical cue age on chemically-mediated antipredator behavior in the wolf spider Pardosa milvina (Araneae: Lycosidae). — J. Insect Behav. 15: 269-281.
-
Brennan B. (2002). Habitat use by the flat rock spider, Hemicloea major: roles of food and temperature. — The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW.
-
Chivers D.P., Mirza R.S., Bryer P.J., Kiesecker J.M. (2001). Threat-sensitive predator avoidance by slimy sculpins: understanding the importance of visual versus chemical information. — Can. J. Zool. 79: 867-873.
-
Crist T.O., Wiens J.A. (1996). The distribution of ant colonies in a semiarid landscape: implications for community and ecosystem processes. — Oikos 76: 301-311.
-
Croak B.M., Pike D.A., Webb J.K., Shine R. (2010). Using artificial rocks to restore nonrenewable shelter sites in human-degraded systems: colonization by fauna. — Restor. Ecol. 18: 428-438.
-
Cushing P.E. (1997). Myrmecomorphy and myrmecophily in spiders: a review. — Florida Entomol. 80: 165-193.
-
Cushing P.E. (2012). Spider–ant associations: an updated review of myrmecomorphy, myrmecophily, and myrmecophagy in spiders. — Psyche: 151989.
-
Dicke M., Grostal P. (2001). Chemical detection of natural enemies by arthropods: an ecological perspective. — Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 32: 1-23.
-
Dugatkin L.A. (1997). Winner and loser effects and the structure of dominance hierarchies. — Behav. Ecol. 8: 583-587.
-
Foelix R. (2011). Biology of spiders. — Oxford University Press, New York, NY.
-
Foelix R.F. (1970). Chemosensitive hairs in spiders. — J. Morphol. 132: 313-333.
-
Fuelling O., Halle S. (2004). Breeding suppression in free-ranging grey-sided voles under the influence of predator odour. — Oecologia 138: 151-159.
-
Goldsbrough C., Hochuli D., Shine R. (2003). Invertebrate biodiversity under hot rocks: habitat use by the fauna of sandstone outcrops in the Sydney region. — Biol. Conserv. 109: 85-93.
-
Hölldobler B., Wilson E.O. (1990). The ants. — The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.
-
Johnson A., Revis O., Johnson J.C. (2011). Chemical prey cues influence the urban microhabitat preferences of western black widow spiders, Latrodectus hesperus. — J. Arachnol. 39: 449-453.
-
Karavanich C., Atema J. (1998). Individual recognition and memory in lobster dominance. — Anim. Behav. 56: 1553-1560.
-
Kats L.B., Dill L.M. (1998). The scent of death: chemosensory assessment of predation risk by prey animals. — Ecoscience 5: 361-394.
-
Koskela E., Ylonen H. (1995). Suppressed breeding in the field vole (Microtus agrestis): an adaptation to cyclically fluctuating predation risk. — Behav. Ecol. 6: 311-315.
-
Lima S.L., Dill L.M. (1990). Behavioral decisions made under the risk of predation: a review and prospectus. — Can. J. Zool. 68: 619-640.
-
MacMahon J.A., Mull J.F., Crist T.O. (2000). Harvester ants (Pogonomyrmex spp.): their community and ecosystem influences. — Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 31: 265-291.
-
Muller K.L., Stamps J.A., Krishnan V.V., Willits N.H. (1997). The effects of conspecific attraction and habitat quality on habitat selection in territorial birds. — Am. Nat. 150: 650-661.
-
Nelson X.J., Jackson R.R. (2004). Predation by ants on jumping spiders (Araneae: Salticidae) in the Philippines. — N. Zeal. J. Zool. 31: 45-56.
-
Nelson X.J., Jackson R.R. (2011). Flexibility in the foraging strategies of spiders. — In: Spider behaviour. Flexibility and versatility ( Herberstein M.E., ed.). Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, p. 45-72.
-
Nelson X.J., Jackson R.R. (2014). Timid spider uses odor and visual cues to actively select protected nesting sites near ants. — Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 68: 773-780.
-
Penfold S. (2015). Habitat use and competitive interactions of species in rock outcrop environments. — University of Technology Sydney, Sydney, NSW.
-
Persons M.H., Rypstra A.L. (2000). Preference for chemical cues associated with recent prey in the wolf spider Hogna helluo (Araneae: Lycosidae). — Ethology 106: 27-35.
-
Persons M.H., Rypstra A.L. (2001). Wolf spiders show graded antipredator behavior in the presence of chemical cues from different sized predators. — J. Chem. Ecol. 27: 2493-2504.
-
Persons M.H., Walker S.E., Rypstra A.L. (2002). Fitness costs and benefits of antipredator behavior mediated by chemotactile cues in the wolf spider Pardosa milvina (Araneae: Lycosidae). — Behav. Ecol. 13: 386-392.
-
Pike D.A., Webb J.K., Shine R. (2012). Hot mothers, cool eggs: nest-site selection by egg-guarding spiders accommodates conflicting thermal optima. — Funct. Ecol. 26: 469-475.
-
Platnick N.I. (2002). A revision of the Australasian ground spiders of the families Ammoxenidae, Cithaeronidae, Gallieniellidae, and Trochanteriidae (Araneae: Gnaphosoidea). — Bull. Am. Mus. Nat. Hist. 27: 1-243.
-
Pringle R.M., Webb J.K., Shine R. (2003). Canopy structure, microclimate, and habitat selection by a nocturnal snake, Hoplocephalus bungaroides. — Ecology 84: 2668-2679.
-
Schulte L.M., Yeager J., Schulte R., Veith M., Werner P., Beck L.A., Lötters S. (2011). The smell of success: choice of larval rearing sites by means of chemical cues in a Peruvian poison frog. — Anim. Behav. 81: 1147-1154.
-
Scott M.L., Whiting M.J., Webb J.K., Shine R. (2013). Chemosensory discrimination of social cues mediates space use in snakes, Cryptophis nigrescens (Elapidae). — Anim. Behav. 85: 1493-1500.
-
Smallwood J. (1982). Nest relocations in ants. — Insect. Soc. 29: 138-147.
-
Stamps J.A. (1988). Conspecific attraction and aggregation in territorial species. — Am. Nat. 131: 329-347.
-
Trabalon M. (2013). Chemical communication and contact cuticular compounds in spiders. — In: Spider ecophysiology ( Nentwig W., ed.). Springer, Berlin, p. 125-140.
-
Uhl G. (2013). Spider olfaction: attracting, detecting, luring and avoiding. — In: Spider ecophysiology ( Nentwig W., ed.). Springer, Berlin, p. 141-156.
-
van den Berg F.T. (2015). Ecology of thermally extreme environments: ontogenetic ecophysiology of flat rock spiders, Morebilus plagusius. — PhD thesis, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW.
-
van den Berg F.T., Thompson M.B., Hochuli D.F. (2015). When hot rocks get hotter: behavior and acclimatization mitigate exposure to extreme temperatures in a spider. — Ecosphere 6: 88.
-
Webb J.K., Shine R. (2000). Paving the way for habitat restoration: can artificial rocks restore degraded habitats of endangered reptiles? — Biol. Conserv. 92: 93-99.
| All Time | Past 365 days | Past 30 Days | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Abstract Views | 691 | 77 | 8 |
| Full Text Views | 221 | 1 | 0 |
| PDF Views & Downloads | 40 | 1 | 0 |
Chemical cues influence retreat-site selection by flat rock spiders
In: BehaviourSearch for other papers by Scott Penfold in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Buddhi Dayananda in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Jonathan K. Webb in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Many animals use chemical cues to detect conspecifics and predators. On sandstone outcrops, flat rock spiders Morebilus plagusius and Polyrachis ants use sun-exposed rocks as nest sites, and defend rocks from intruders. We investigated whether chemical cues influenced retreat-site selection by spiders. In the field, spiders showed significant avoidance of rocks used by ants. In laboratory trials, we gave spiders the choice between conspecific-scented and unscented refuges, and ant-scented and unscented refuges. In conspecific scent trials, spiders showed no avoidance of spider scented refuges during the night, but significantly more spiders chose unscented refuges as their diurnal retreat-site. In ant scent trials, spiders made more visits to unscented refuges than ant-scented refuges during the night, and significantly more spiders chose unscented refuges as their diurnal retreat site. Our results demonstrate that spiders can detect chemical cues from ants and conspecifics, and that such cues influence retreat-site selection.
| All Time | Past 365 days | Past 30 Days | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Abstract Views | 691 | 77 | 8 |
| Full Text Views | 221 | 1 | 0 |
| PDF Views & Downloads | 40 | 1 | 0 |
