Phytochemical cues affect hunting-site choices of a nursery web spider (Pisaura mirabilis) but not a crab spider (Misumena vatia)

Junker, Robert R.; Bretscher, Simon; Dötterl, Stefan; Blüthgen, Nico

doi:10.1636/hi10-14.1

Cited by 12 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 32 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Females displayed no tendency to move first toward the R. hirta inflorescence over a water control, but they did spend significantly more time in the floral treatment arm during the trials. When Junker et al (2011) gave Misumena vatia females the choice between inflorescences and leaves of five species in laboratory trials (via intact plant material as well as hexane extracts of the plant parts), they reported no significant preferences for floral over foliar options. The latter finding does not preclude floral scent attraction, however, since the lack of a preference between the two parts of the plant does not rule out equivalent levels of attraction to both.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Kairomones have been implicated in spiders' abilities to locate and discriminate among prey species, as well as avoid predators (Allan et al 1996;Kaspi 2000;Hostettler & Nentwig 2006;Schonewolf et al 2006;Cross & Jackson 2010). Olfactory or gustatory cues also enable spiders to find nectar sources (Patt & Pfannenstiel 2008), optimal hunting sites (Heiling et al 2004;Junker et al 2011) and substrates with greater prospects for locating mates (Stellwag & Dodson 2010). Among amblypygids, Hebets & Chapman (2000) recorded electrophysiological responses to a tremendous variety of volatile chemicals in the antenniform legs of one tropical species, and olfactory cues alone were sufficient for kin discrimination in a social species (Walsh & Rayor 2008).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Specificity of attraction to floral chemistry inMisumenoides formosipescrab spiders

Dodson¹,

Lang

Jones

et al. 2013

Journal of Arachnology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although our understanding of arachnid olfactory physiology remains relatively limited, studies continue to reveal the importance of chemical cues for many spider behaviors. Olfactory cues for detecting prey, navigating to foraging sites, or finding mates might be especially beneficial to cursorial and ambush spiders living in structurally complex habitats. Previous field results suggested that volatile plant chemical cues were important in Misumenoides formosipes Walckenaer 1837 (Thomisidae) navigation and led us to design olfactometer bioassays to test this hypothesis in the laboratory. In our olfactometer trials, crab spider males were attracted specifically to the fioral scent of Rudbeckia hirta (a species on which M. formosipes is commonly found in the field), but not to volatiles from foliage of the same plant species nor to volatiles from foliage of Moms rubra. Male spiders also failed to display any attraction to the fioral scent of Daucus carota, even though they commonly reside on that plant in the field. Female M. formosipes did not move toward R. hirta inflorescences as a first choice over a control, although they did spend more time in the olfactometer arm with the R. hirta treatment. Males' use of olfactory cues to locate R. hirta inflorescences should increase encounters with potential mates, given that females in our population are found on that substrate more predictably than on any other.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Specificity of attraction to floral chemistry inMisumenoides formosipescrab spiders

Dodson¹,

Lang

Jones

et al. 2013

Journal of Arachnology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Michalková and Pekár 11 for contradictory data); some species avoided even Bacillus thuringiensis (Novodor SC) residues 7 . Concening natural products, repellent effects were reported for β-caryophyllene and nerolidol in Pisaura mirabilis 12 , nicotin in wolf spiders 13 , chestnuts in multiple spider species 14 , neem ( Azadirachta indica ) seed oil in multiple spider species 15 , and mint oil in Latrodectus geometricus 14 . In some cases, the repellence (or toxicity itself) could be caused by additives present in pesticide formulations 16 .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Prey contaminated with neonicotinoids induces feeding deterrent behavior of a common farmland spider

Korenko

Saska

Kysilková

et al. 2019

Sci Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Neonicotinoids are thought to have negligible repellent or anti-feeding effects. Based on our preliminary observations, we hypothesized that the contamination of spider prey with commonly used neonicotinoids has repellent or feeding deterrent effects on spiders. We tested this hypothesis by providing prey treated or not with field-realistic concentrations of neonicotinoids to the spiders and determining the number of (a) killed only and (b) killed and eaten prey. We exposed adult freshly molted and starved Pardosa agrestis, a common agrobiont lycosid species, to flies treated with neonicotinoids (acetamiprid, imidacloprid, thiacloprid and thiamethoxam) at field-realistic concentrations or with distilled water as a control. There were no effects of the exposure of the prey to neonicotinoids on the number of flies captured. However, the spiders consumed less of the prey treated with neonicotinoids compared to the ratio of control prey consumed, which resulted in increased overkilling (i.e., killing without feeding). In female P. agrestis, the overkilling increased from only 2.6% of control flies to 25–45% of neonicotinoid-treated flies. As the spiders avoided consuming the already captured neonicotinoid-treated prey, the sublethal effects of neonicotinoids extend beyond the simple attractivity/deterrence of the prey itself. The present study demonstrated that prey overkilling serves as a physiological response of spiders to the contact with the prey contaminated with agrochemicals. We speculate that primary contact with neonicotinoids during prey capture may play a role in this unexpected behavior.

show abstract

“…The evidence that some spiders select plants with similar architectural features by using visual cues is strong (reviewed in Vasconcellos-Neto et al [ 9 ]), but few studies have explored whether chemical signals are involved in host plant recognition. However, the examples are known to include the nursery web spider [ 134 ], crab spiders [ 22 , 135 ], and jumping spiders [ 136 ]. For instance, pitfall traps baited with eugenol—which is a flower component fragrance—caught more individuals of two Thomisus species (Thomisidae), as compared to controls [ 22 ].…”

Section: How Might Spiders Identify and Locate Their Host Plant?mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Similarly, Thomisus spectabilis chose the same flower more often than a honeybee, when there was a flower odour signal present [ 135 ]. Interestingly, chemical recognition of the host plant is species-specific in some cases, with some plant chemicals inducing responses in some spiders but not in others [ 134 , 137 ]. Thus, it remains a possibility that the Eustala spiders use plant volatiles to locate their hosts.…”

Section: How Might Spiders Identify and Locate Their Host Plant?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Host Plant Specificity in Web-Building Spiders

Hesselberg

Boyd

Styrsky

et al. 2023

Insects

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Spiders are ubiquitous generalist predators playing an important role in regulating insect populations in many ecosystems. Traditionally they have not been thought to have strong influences on, or interactions with plants. However, this is slowly changing as several species of cursorial spiders have been reported engaging in either herbivory or inhabiting only one, or a handful of related plant species. In this review paper, we focus on web-building spiders on which very little information is available. We only find well-documented evidence from studies of host plant specificity in orb spiders in the genus Eustala, which are associated with specific species of swollen thorn acacias. We review what little is known of this group in the context of spider–plant interactions generally, and focus on how these interactions are established and maintained while providing suggestions on how spiders may locate and identify specific species of plants. Finally, we suggest ideas for future fruitful research aimed at understanding how web-building spiders find and utilise specific plant hosts.

show abstract

Phytochemical cues affect hunting-site choices of a nursery web spider (Pisaura mirabilis) but not a crab spider (Misumena vatia)

Cited by 12 publications

References 32 publications

Specificity of attraction to floral chemistry inMisumenoides formosipescrab spiders

Specificity of attraction to floral chemistry inMisumenoides formosipescrab spiders

Prey contaminated with neonicotinoids induces feeding deterrent behavior of a common farmland spider

Host Plant Specificity in Web-Building Spiders

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About