Foraging Strategies of Cursorial and Ambush Spiders

Willemart, Rodrigo Hirata; Lacava, Mariángeles

doi:10.1007/978-3-319-65717-2_9

Cited by 11 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 117 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…These nocturnal hunters ambush their prey on the foliage or on the soil surface (Jocqué & Dippenaar‐Schoeman, 2006; Schmitt et al., 1990), and may detect prey visually or by means of air or ground vibrations (Neuhofer et al., 2009). Although Ctenids’ diet is mainly composed by terrestrial invertebrates (Willemart & Lacava, 2017), there are numerous cases of these spiders consuming vertebrates such as fish (Nyffeler & Pusey, 2014), amphibians (Nyffeler & Altig, 2020; Salas et al., 2019; Valdez, 2020), and lizards (this review). In addition, it has been pointed out that because ctenids can reach high densities in the forest floor, vertebrate predation by these spiders can be ecologically important (Menin et al., 2005).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Different characteristics allow spiders to consume such diversity of vertebrates, including the possession of strong fangs that can pierce vertebrate skin and inoculate paralyzing neurotoxins (Foelix, 2011; Garb & Hayashi, 2013). In addition, spiders have a generalist diet (Riechert & Harp, 1987) and a variety of hunting modalities, ranging from active foraging to ambush or sit‐and‐wait strategies (Willemart & Lacava, 2017), combined with the ability to build webs to trap prey (Foelix, 2011; Gosline et al., 1999). All these characteristics, in addition to the fact that spiders can have larger body size than some vertebrate species, allow them to prey upon different vertebrate taxa (McCormick & Polis, 1982; Vieira et al., 2012).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Lizard predation by spiders: A review from the Neotropical and Andean regions

Reyes-Olivares

Guajardo-Santibáñez²,

Segura³

et al. 2020

Ecology and Evolution

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Vertebrate predation by invertebrates has been classically underexplored and thus underestimated, despite the fact that many arthropods consume vertebrates. To shed some light on the relevance that spider predation may have upon lizards in the Neotropical and Andean regions, we compiled the available information in the literature on this trophic interaction. We found 50 reports of spiders consuming lizards in these regions, and the 88% of these were from the Neotropical region. Spiders belong to eight families, but Ctenidae and Theraphosidae were the most frequently reported predators. Lizards belong to 12 families, and the most commonly consumed species corresponded to the families Dactyloidae (all Anolis lizards), Gymnophthalmidae, and Sphaerodactylidae. Data suggest trophic spider–lizard associations between Ctenidae and Dactyloidae, followed by Theraphosidae and Liolaemidae. The body sizes of the spiders and lizards showed a positive relationship, and spiders were smaller than their prey. We conclude that various spider taxa can be considered lizard predators and they may be ecologically important in the Neotropical and Andean regions. However, spiders of prime predation relevance seem to be those of the Ctenidae and Theraphosidae families.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Lizard predation by spiders: A review from the Neotropical and Andean regions

Reyes-Olivares

Guajardo-Santibáñez²,

Segura³

et al. 2020

Ecology and Evolution

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…That possibly explains the increased AH abundance in CAN50 treatments. Meanwhile, the increased abundance of AH spiders may intensify intraguild predation or conspecific competition among AH spiders, which may constrain the increase of AH spider diversity (Willemart & Lacava, 2017). Our finding is similar to Oelbermann et al (2008) who found out that the density of AH spiders (e.g., wolf spiders) was increased in prey‐enhancement treatments, but densities of SW spider (e.g., web‐building linyphiids) were not affected by the treatments.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Canopy nitrogen addition affects ground‐dwelling spider assemblages and trophic position

Liu

Meng

Behm

et al. 2022

Insect Conserv Diversity

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

1. While it is clear that nitrogen (N) deposition impacts the plant diversity of major terrestrial ecosystems, how ground-dwelling fauna respond to N deposition is less understood.2. Here, we use a novel experimental methodology of canopy addition of N (CAN) to simulate realistic N deposition and contrast this method to standard understory addition of N (UAN) in a temperate forest and a subtropical forest. We investigated the shifts in community composition and trophic position for ground-dwelling spiders under different N deposition treatments.3. We found that the CAN deposition treatment increased the diversity of sit-andwait spiders and the abundance of actively hunting spiders at the subtropical forest, but N treatments had no effect on spider abundance or diversity at the temperate forest. In contrast, UAN treatments had no significant impact on spider communities compared to control treatment. Furthermore, N treatments had significant effects on spider assemblage at subtropical forest. Overall, spiders in the CAN treatment had a higher trophic position as indicated by δ 15 N isotopic signatures at both forest types. 4. In conclusion, our study suggests that the effects of N deposition on grounddwelling spider assemblages depend on N addition approaches. Furthermore, our results suggest that CAN is a more realistic method for understanding the effects of atmospheric N deposition on soil arthropods in forest ecosystems. K E Y W O R D S 15 N and 13 C stable isotope, atmospheric nitrogen, canopy and understory, foraging strategy, global change, subtropical and temperate forest Shengjie Liu and Yuanyuan Meng contributed equally to this work.

show abstract

“…Similarly, ambush hunters such as common crab spider Xysticus cristatus were more abundant in surrounding undisturbed grasslands. The determining factor for these non‐web‐building spiders is the type of substrate where they prey, because they often rely on substrate‐borne vibrations to find their prey (Willemart & Lacava, ). From this point of view, the compact vegetation layer represents much better micro‐habitat as open ground where substrates bearing the vibrations are limited.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Spider (Araneae) and harvestman (Opiliones) communities are structured by the ecosystem engineering of burrowing mammals

Lindtner

Gajdoš

Stašiov

et al. 2019

Insect Conserv Diversity

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

1. Burrowing mammals through their digging activities are important ecosystem engineers and bioturbators in grassland ecosystems. Through habitat formation, they can have significant effects on other species in an ecosystem, structuring their abundance and diversity.2. We analysed the effect of the European ground squirrel (Spermophilus citellus) on spider (Araneae) and harvestman (Opiliones) communities, because these arachnids are the most abundant and dominant predators with a great variety of foraging strategies, and their community composition is strongly influenced by the physical structure of the environment.3. We established replicate mound plots positioned directly in the centre of ground squirrel mounds with paired off-mound control plots undisturbed by ground squirrels. We sampled spiders and harvestmen using pitfall traps on 30 ground squirrel mounds and 30 paired off-mound control plots at two study sites differing in grazing intensity and plant species richness.4. We found that the response of spiders was site-specific, while harvestmen responded consistently to disturbances by burrowing mammals. Mounds exhibited increased abundance and species richness of harvestmen at both study sites, while species richness of spiders was increased only in intensively managed grassland. We also detected compositional changes of the arachnid community on the mounds in comparison to the grassland matrix. 5. Our findings indicate that burrowing mammals through physical state changes in abiotic and biotic material modulate the resources for other species and maintain a high diversity of biotic communities in intensively grazed grasslands.

show abstract

Foraging Strategies of Cursorial and Ambush Spiders

Cited by 11 publications

References 117 publications

Lizard predation by spiders: A review from the Neotropical and Andean regions

Lizard predation by spiders: A review from the Neotropical and Andean regions

Canopy nitrogen addition affects ground‐dwelling spider assemblages and trophic position

Spider (Araneae) and harvestman (Opiliones) communities are structured by the ecosystem engineering of burrowing mammals

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About