Limited perceptual range and presence of conspecifics both affect the ability of pit-building wormlions to choose favorable microhabitats
In: Israel Journal of Ecology and EvolutionInstitute of Organismic and Molecular Evolution, Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz, Mainz, Germany
Search for other papers by Inon Scharf in
Current site
Google Scholar
Search for other papers by Yehonatan Samocha in
Current site
Google Scholar
Search for other papers by Noa Katz in
Current site
Google Scholar
Abstract
When choosing among several potential habitats, animals should strive to choose the habitat that provides the highest fitness. When animals choose habitats that do not provide the best possible fitness, there is a mismatch between habitat preference and performance. A common reason is that of limited information or perceptual range. Sit-and-wait predators are particularly deficient in information, due to spending most of their time in ambushing prey and, when they do travel, they cover only short distances. Here, we studied the effect of placing pit-building wormlions at a short distance from their preferred microhabitats, on the likelihood of them choosing it. When placed on the border between deep and shallow sand, fine and coarse sand, or dry and wet sand, wormlions chose the former in each case in vast proportions. However, the ability of wormlions to recognize and/or choose favorable habitats decreased sharply with distance, suggesting that they are limited in their perceptual range. We next examined whether wormlions relocate their pits following a continuous disturbance arriving always from the same side. Although they did so, their movement direction was unrelated to the direction of the disturbance. The preference of wormlions for a favorable, shaded microhabitat depended greatly on the location of a conspecific competitor: the favorable microhabitat was more attractive for wormlions when a competitor was more distant from it than when the competitor was located on the border between the favorable and unfavorable microhabitats. Our findings support previous studies indicating the limited perceptual range of pit-building predators.
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
-
Abrahams M.V. (1986). Patch choice under perceptual constraints: a cause for departures from an ideal free distribution. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 19, pp. 409–415.
-
Abràmoff D.M. , Paulo J.M. , and Sunanda J.R. (2004). Image processing with imageJ. Biophotonics Int 11, pp. 36–41
-
Adar S. , and Dor R. (2018). Mother doesn't always know best: Maternal wormlion choice of oviposition habitat does not match larval habitat choice. Behav Proc 147, pp. 1–4.
-
Adar S. , Dor R. , and Scharf I. (2016a). Habitat choice and complex decision making in a trap-building predator. Behav Ecol 27, pp. 1491–1498.
-
Adar S. , Scharf I. , and Dor R. (2016b). The effect of previous experience on trap construction and movement distance in a pit-building predator. Sci Nat 103, ms. 83.
-
Ayers D.Y. , and Shine R. (1997). Thermal influences on foraging ability: body size, posture and cooling rate of an ambush predator, the python Morelia spilota. Funct Ecol 11, pp. 342–347.
-
Bar-Ziv M.A. , Bega D. , Subach A. , and Scharf I. (2018a). Wormlions prefer both fine and deep sand but only deep sand leads to better performance. Curr Zool (in press; doi.org/10.1093/cz/zoy065).
-
Bar-Ziv M.A. , Subach A. , Hirsch-Ionescu A. , Belmaker J. , Zweifler A. , and Scharf I. (2018b). Comparison of wormlions and their immediate habitat under man-made and natural shelters: suggesting factors making wormlions successful in cities. Zoology 130, pp. 38–46.
-
Battin J. (2004). When good animals love bad habitats: ecological traps and the conservation of animal populations. Conserv Biol 18, pp. 1482–1491.
-
Barkae E.D. , Scharf I. , Abramsky Z. , and Ovadia O. (2012). Jack of all trades, master of all: a positive association between habitat niche breadth and foraging performance in pit-building antlion larvae. PLoS One 7, ms. e33506.
-
Beachly W.M. , Stephens D.W. , & Toyer K.B. (1995). On the economics of sit-and-wait foraging: site selection and assessment. Behav Ecol 6, pp. 258–268.
-
Blamires, S.J. (2019). Biomechanical costs and benefits of sit-and-wait foraging traps. Isr J Ecol Evol, this issue.
-
Chittka L. (2001). Camouflage of predatory crab spiders on flowers and the colour perception of bees (Aranida: Thomisidae/Hymenoptera: Apidae). Entomol Gener 25, pp. 181–187.
-
Chmiel K. , Herberstein M.E. , and Elgar M. A. (2000). Web damage and feeding experience influence web site tenacity in the orb-web spider Argiope keyserlingi Karsch. Anim Behav 60, pp. 821–826.
-
Day M. D. , & Zalucki M. P. (2000). Effect of density on spatial distribution, pit formation and pit diameter of Myrmeleon acer Walker (Neuroptera: Myrmeleontidae): patterns and processes. Austral Ecol 25, pp. 58–64.
-
Decaestecker E. , De Meester L. , and Ebert D. (2002). In deep trouble: habitat selection constrained by multiple enemies in zooplankton. Proc Nat Acad Sci 99, pp. 5481–5485.
-
Devetak D. (1985) Detection of substrate vibrations in the antlion larva, Myrmeleon formicarius (Neuroptera: Myrmeleonidae). Bioloski Vestnik 33, pp. 11–22.
-
Devetak D. (2008). Substrate particle size-preference of wormlion Vermileo vermileo (Diptera: Vermileonidae) larvae and their interaction with antlions. Eur J Entomol, 105, pp. 631–635.
-
Devetak D. , and Arnett A.E. (2015). Preference of antlion and wormlion larvae (Neuroptera: Myrmeleontidae; Diptera: Vermileonidae) for substrates according to substrate particle sizes. Eur J Entomol 112, pp. 500–509.
-
Devetak D. , Mencinger-Vračko B. , Devetak M. , Marhl M. , and Špernjak A. (2007). Sand as a medium for transmission of vibratory signals of prey in antlions Euroleon nostras (Neuroptera: Myrmeleontidae). Physiol Entomol 32, pp. 268–274.
-
Devetak D. , Novak T. , and Janžekovič F. (2012). Effect of substrate density on behaviour of antlion larvae (Neuroptera: Myrmeleontidae). Acta Oecolog 43, pp. 1–7.
-
Doligez B. , Pärt T. , and Danchin E. (2004). Prospecting in the collared flycatcher: gathering public information for future breeding habitat selection? Anim Behav 67, pp. 457–466.
-
Dor R. , Rosenstein S. , and Scharf I. (2014). Foraging behaviour of a neglected pit-building predator: the wormlion. Anim Behav 93, pp. 69–76.
-
Eltz T. (1997). Foraging in the ant-lion Myrmeleon mobilis hagen 1888 (neuroptera: Myrmeleontidae): Behavioral flexibility of a sit-and-wait predator. J Insect Behav, 10, pp. 1–11.
-
Edwards W. , Whytlaw P.A. , Congdon B.C. , and Gaskett C. (2009). Is optimal foraging a realistic expectation in orb‐web spiders? Ecol Entomol 34, pp. 527–534.
-
Farji-Brener A.G. (2003). Microhabitat selection by antlion larvae, Myrmeleon crudelis: effect of soil particle size on pit-trap design and prey capture. J Insect Behav 16, pp. 783–796.
-
Fretwell S.D. (1969). On territorial behavior and other factors influencing habitat distribution in birds. Acta Biotheor 19, pp. 45–52.
-
Griffiths D. (1986). Pit construction by ant-lion larvae: a cost-benefit analysis. J Anim Ecol 55, pp. 39–57.
-
Gripenberg S. , Mayhew P.J. , Parnell M. , and Roslin T. (2010). A meta‐analysis of preference–performance relationships in phytophagous insects. Ecol Lett 13, pp. 383–393.
-
Halliday W.D. , and Blouin‐Demers G. (2014). Red flour beetles balance thermoregulation and food acquisition via density‐dependent habitat selection. J Zool 294, pp. 198–205.
-
Hodge M.A. (1987). Factors influencing web site residence time of the orb weaving spider, Micrathena gracilis. Psyche 94, pp. 363–371.
-
Hollander F.A. , Van Dyck H. , San Martin G. , and Titeux N. (2011). Maladaptive habitat selection of a migratory passerine bird in a human-modified landscape. PLoS One 6, ms. e25703.
-
Hollis K.L. , Cogswell H. , Snyder K. , Guillette L.M. , and Nowbahari E. (2011). Specialized learning in antlions (Neuroptera: Myrmeleontidae), pit-digging predators, shortens vulnerable larval stage. PLoS One 6, ms. e17958.
-
Huey R.B. (1991). Physiological consequences of habitat selection. Am Nat, 137, pp. S91–S115.
-
Huey R.B. , and Pianka E.R. (1981). Ecological consequences of foraging mode. Ecology 62, pp. 991–999.
-
Katz N. , Pruitt J.N. , and Scharf I. (2017a). The complex effect of illumination, temperature, and thermal acclimation on habitat choice and foraging behavior of a pit-building wormlion. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 71, ms. 137.
-
Katz N. , Shavit R. , Pruitt J.N. , and Scharf I. (2017b). Group dynamics and relocation decisions of a trap-building predator are differentially affected by biotic and abiotic factors. Curr Zool 63, pp. 647–655.
-
Katz N. , Subach A. , Pruitt J.N. , and Scharf I. (2016). Habitat preference of wormlions and their behavioural repeatability under illumination/shade conditions. Ecol Entomol 41, pp. 716–726.
-
Katz N. , and Scharf I. (2018). Habitat geometry and limited perceptual range affect habitat choice of a trap-building predator. Behav Ecol 29, pp. 958–964.
-
Kennedy M. , and Gray R.D. (1993). Can ecological theory predict the distribution of foraging animals? A critical analysis of experiments on the ideal free distribution. Oikos 68, pp. 158–166.
-
Kuszewska K. , Miler K. , Filipiak M. , and Woyciechowski M. (2016). Sedentary antlion larvae (Neuroptera: Myrmeleontidae) use vibrational cues to modify their foraging strategies. Anim Cogn 19, pp. 1037–1041.
-
Lima S.L. , and Zollner P.A. (1996). Towards a behavioral ecology of ecological landscapes. Trends Ecol Evol 11, pp. 131–135.
-
Lubin Y. , Ellner S. , and Kotzman M. (1993). Web relocation and habitat selection in desert widow spider. Ecology 74, pp. 1915–1928.
-
Lucas J.R. (1982). The biophysics of pit construction by antlion larvae (Myrmeleon, Neuroptera). Anim Behav 30, pp. 651–664.
-
Mayor S.J. , Schneider D.C. , Schaefer J.A. , and Mahoney S.P. (2009). Habitat selection at multiple scales. EcoScience 16, pp. 238–247.
-
Matsura T. (1987). An experimental study on the foraging behavior of a pit‐building antlion larva, Myrmeleon bore. Popul Ecol 29, pp. 17–26.
-
Matsura T. , Yamaga Y. , and Itoh M. (2005). Substrate selection for pit making and oviposition in an antlion, Myrmeleon bore Tjeder, in terms of sand particle size. Entomol Sci 8, pp. 347–353.
-
McNamara J.M. , and Houston A.I. (1985). Optimal foraging and learning. J Theor Biol 117, pp. 231–249.
-
Mcnett B.J. , and Rypstra A.L. (2000). Habitat selection in a large orb‐weaving spider: vegetational complexity determines site selection and distribution. Ecol Entomol 25, pp. 423–432.
-
Miler K. , Yahya B.E. , and Czarnoleski M. (2018a). Different predation efficiencies of trap‐building larvae of sympatric antlions and wormlions from the rainforest of Borneo. Ecol Entomol 43, pp. 255–262.
-
Miler K. , Kuszewska K. , Zuber G. , and Woyciechowski M. (2018). Larval antlions show a cognitive ability/hunting efficiency trade-off connected with the level of behavioural asymmetry. Anim Cogn 21, pp. 613–617.
-
Miler K. , Yahya B.E. , and Czarnoleski M. (2019). Substrate moisture, particle size and temperature preferences of trap‐building larvae of sympatric antlions and wormlions from the rainforest of Borneo. Ecol Entomol (in press; doi.org/10.1111/een.12725).
-
Morris D.W. (2003). Toward an ecological synthesis: a case for habitat selection. Oecologia, 136, pp. 1–13.
-
Nakata K. , and Ushimaru A. (1999). Feeding experience affects web relocation and investment in web threads in an orb-web spider, Cyclosa argenteoalba. Anim Behav 57, pp. 1251–1255.
-
Orians G.H. , and Wittenberger J.F. (1991). Spatial and temporal scales in habitat selection. The Am Nat 137, pp. S29–S49.
-
Ovadia O. , and Abramsky Z. (1995). Density-dependent habitat selection: evaluation of the isodar method. Oikos 73, pp. 86–94.
-
Parker G.A. , and Sutherland W.J. (1986). Ideal free distributions when individuals differ in competitive ability: phenotype-limited ideal free models. Anim Behav 34, pp. 1222–1242.
-
Parthasarathy, B., and Somanathan, H. (2019). When and why do sit-and-wait social spiders disperse? Isr J Ecol Evol, this issue.
-
Pringle R.M. , Webb J.K. , and Shine R. (2003). Canopy structure, microclimate, and habitat selection by a nocturnal snake, Hoplocephalus bungaroides. Ecology 84, pp. 2668–2679.
-
Reed J.M. , Boulinier T. , Danchin E. , and Oring L.W. (1999). Informed dispersal: prospecting by birds for breeding sites. Curr Ornithol 15, pp. 189–259.
-
Riechert S. E. (1985). Decisions in multiple goal contexts: habitat selection of the spider, Agelenopsis aperta (Gertsch). Z Tierpsychol, 70, pp. 53–69.
-
Rodriguez-Morales, D., Hernandez-Salazar, L.T., Ajuria-Ibarra, H., Rico-Gray, V., Garcia-Franco, J.G., and Rao, D. (2019). Response of flower visitors to the morphology and color of crab spiders in a coastal environment of the Gulf of Mexico. Isr J Ecol Evol, this issue.
-
Rosenzweig M.L. (1981). A theory of habitat selection. Ecology 62, pp. 327–335.
-
Samocha Y. , and Scharf I. (2019). Comparison of wormlion behavior under man-made and natural shelters: urban wormlions more strongly prefer shaded, fine-sand microhabitats, construct larger pits and respond faster to prey. Curr Zool (in press; doi.org/10.1093/cz/zoz006).
-
Scharf I. , Gilad T. , Bar-Ziv M.A. , Katz N. , Gregorian E. , Pruitt J.N. , and Subach A. (2018). The contribution of shelter from rain to the success of pit-building predators in urban habitats. Anim Behav 142, pp. 139–145.
-
Scharf I. , Lubin Y. , and Ovadia O. (2011). Foraging decisions and behavioural flexibility in trap‐building predators: a review. Biol Rev 86, pp. 626–639.
-
Scharf I. , and Ovadia O. (2006). Factors influencing site abandonment and site selection in a sit-and-wait predator: a review of pit-building antlion larvae. J Insect Behav 19, pp. 197–218.
-
Scharf I. , Subach A. , and Ovadia O. (2008). Foraging behaviour and habitat selection in pit-building antlion larvae in constant light or dark conditions. Anim Behav, 76, pp. 2049–2057.
-
Schmitz O.J. , and Sokol‐Hessner L. (2002). Linearity in the aggregate effects of multiple predators in a food web. Ecol Lett 5, pp. 168–172.
-
Schooley R.L. , and Branch L.C. (2005). Limited perceptual range and anemotaxis in marsh rice rats Oryzomys palustris. Acta Theriol 50, pp. 59–66.
-
Schooley R.L. , and Wiens J.A. (2003). Finding habitat patches and directional connectivity. Oikos 102, pp. 559–570.
-
Segura D.F. , Viscarret M.M. , Paladino L.Z.C. , Ovruski S.M. , and Cladera J.L. (2007). Role of visual information and learning in habitat selection by a generalist parasitoid foraging for concealed hosts. Anim Behav 74, pp. 131–142.
-
Tregenza T. (1995). Building on the ideal free distribution. Adv Ecol Res 26, pp. 253–307.
-
Ward D. , and Lubin Y. (1993). Habitat selection and the life history of a desert spider, Stegodyphus lineatus (Eresidae). J Anim Ecol 62, pp. 353–363.
-
Yeomans R.S. (1995). Water-finding in adult turtles: random search or oriented behaviour? Anim Behav 49, 977–987.
| All Time | Past Year | Past 30 Days | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Abstract Views | 375 | 52 | 5 |
| Full Text Views | 31 | 13 | 3 |
| PDF Views & Downloads | 19 | 8 | 0 |
Limited perceptual range and presence of conspecifics both affect the ability of pit-building wormlions to choose favorable microhabitats
In: Israel Journal of Ecology and EvolutionInstitute of Organismic and Molecular Evolution, Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz, Mainz, Germany
Search for other papers by Inon Scharf in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Yehonatan Samocha in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Noa Katz in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Abstract
When choosing among several potential habitats, animals should strive to choose the habitat that provides the highest fitness. When animals choose habitats that do not provide the best possible fitness, there is a mismatch between habitat preference and performance. A common reason is that of limited information or perceptual range. Sit-and-wait predators are particularly deficient in information, due to spending most of their time in ambushing prey and, when they do travel, they cover only short distances. Here, we studied the effect of placing pit-building wormlions at a short distance from their preferred microhabitats, on the likelihood of them choosing it. When placed on the border between deep and shallow sand, fine and coarse sand, or dry and wet sand, wormlions chose the former in each case in vast proportions. However, the ability of wormlions to recognize and/or choose favorable habitats decreased sharply with distance, suggesting that they are limited in their perceptual range. We next examined whether wormlions relocate their pits following a continuous disturbance arriving always from the same side. Although they did so, their movement direction was unrelated to the direction of the disturbance. The preference of wormlions for a favorable, shaded microhabitat depended greatly on the location of a conspecific competitor: the favorable microhabitat was more attractive for wormlions when a competitor was more distant from it than when the competitor was located on the border between the favorable and unfavorable microhabitats. Our findings support previous studies indicating the limited perceptual range of pit-building predators.
| All Time | Past Year | Past 30 Days | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Abstract Views | 375 | 52 | 5 |
| Full Text Views | 31 | 13 | 3 |
| PDF Views & Downloads | 19 | 8 | 0 |