Predation-related odours reduce oviposition in a herbivorous mite

Choh, Yasuyuki; Uefune, Masayoshi; Takabayashi, Junji

doi:10.1007/s10493-009-9277-8

Cited by 30 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 30 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Aphids responded to predation risk by producing more nymphs on the low resistance plants. Risk of predation has been shown to reduce prey reproduction (Walzer & Schausberger ; Choh, Uefune & Takabayashi ; Clinchy, Sheriff & Zanette ), but some studies suggested that females with low life expectancy may increase reproduction (Roitberg et al . ; Fletcher, Hughes & Harvey ; Javoiš & Tammaru ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Plant resistance reduces the strength of consumptive and non‐consumptive effects of predators on aphids

Kersch-Becker

Thaler

2015

Journal of Animal Ecology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Summary1. The impact of predators on prey has traditionally been attributed to the act of consumption. Prey responses to the presence of the predator (non-consumptive effects), however, can be as important as predation itself. While plant defences are known to influence predatorprey interactions, their relative effects on consumptive vs. non-consumptive effects are not well understood. 2. We evaluated the consequences of plant resistance and predators (Hippodamia convergens) on the mass, number of nymphs, population growth, density and dispersal of aphids (Macrosiphum euphorbiae). We tested for the effects of plant resistance on non-consumptive and consumptive effects of predators on aphid performance and dispersal using a combination of path analysis and experimental manipulation of predation risk. 3. We manipulated plant resistance using genetically modified lines of tomato (Solanum lycopersicum) that vary incrementally in the expression of the jasmonate pathway, which mediates induced resistance to insects and manipulated aphid exposure to lethal and risk predators. Predation risk predators had mandibles impaired to prevent killing. 4. Plant resistance reduced predation rate (consumptive effect) on high resistance plants. As a consequence, predators had no impact on the number of nymphs, aphid density or population growth on high resistance plants, whereas on low resistance plants, predators reduced aphid density by 35% and population growth by 86%. Path analysis and direct manipulation of predation risk showed that predation risk rather than predation rate promoted aphid dispersal and varied with host plant resistance. Aphid dispersal in response to predation risk was greater on low compared to high resistance plants. The predation risk experiment also showed that the number of aphid nymphs increased in the presence of risk predators but did not translate into increased population growth. 5. In conclusion, the consumptive and non-consumptive components of predators affect different aspects of prey demography, acting together to shape prey population dynamics. While predation risk accounts for most of the total effect of the predator on aphid dispersal and number of nymphs, the suppressive effect of predators on aphid population occurred largely through consumption. These effects are strongly influenced by plant resistance levels, suggesting that they are context dependent.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Plant resistance reduces the strength of consumptive and non‐consumptive effects of predators on aphids

Kersch-Becker

Thaler

2015

Journal of Animal Ecology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In spider mites, the anti-predator responses described thus far mainly concern the avoidance of patches with high predation risk (Grostal and Dicke 1999; Pallini et al 1999; Magalhães et al 2002; Choh and Takabayashi 2007), but recently attention has also been given to predator-induced diapause (Kroon et al 2008) and reduction of oviposition (Oku et al 2004; Skaloudova et al 2007; Choh et al 2010). Spider mites are also hypothesized to reduce predation risk through the production of a dense web (Sabelis and Bakker 1992; Oku et al 2003; Horita et al 2004; Shimoda et al 2009).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Spider mite web mediates anti-predator behaviour

et al. 2010

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Herbivores suffer significant mortality from predation and are therefore subject to natural selection on traits promoting predator avoidance and resistance. They can employ an array of strategies to reduce predation, for example through changes in behaviour, morphology and life history. So far, the anti-predator response studied most intensively in spider mites has been the avoidance of patches with high predation risk. Less attention has been given to the dense web produced by spider mites, which is a complex structure of silken threads that is thought to hinder predators. Here, we investigate the effects of the web produced by the red spider mite, Tetranychus evansi Baker & Pritchard, on its interactions with the predatory mite, Phytoseiulus longipes Evans. We tested whether female spider mites recognize predator cues and whether these can induce the spider mites to produce denser web. We found that the prey did not produce denser web in response to such cues, but laid more eggs suspended in the web, away from the leaf surface. These suspended eggs suffered less from predation by P. longipes than eggs that were laid on the leaf surface under the web. Thus, by altering their oviposition behaviour in response to predator cues, females of T. evansi protect their offspring.

show abstract

“…The effect of the cues of the two predator species on the distribution of eggs over disc halves was compared with a GLM with a quasi-binomial error distribution. Because spider mites are known to produce fewer eggs as a response to predator cues (Oku et al 2004 ; Skaloudova et al 2007 ; Choh et al 2010 ), we also offered leaf discs entirely covered with predator cues or entirely clean. Discs of the same size as above either received 25 female predators for 4 h or were left clean.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In spider mites, antipredator responses to predator cues can be manifested as the avoidance of areas and plants with predators (Grostal and Dicke 1999 ; Pallini et al 1999 ; Magalhaes et al 2002 ; Choh and Takabayashi 2007 ), changes in oviposition site (Grostal and Dicke 1999 ; Lemos et al 2010 ) and moving away from the leaves on which they feed to avoid leaf-dwelling predators and subsequently entering diapause to survive a period of lack of food (Kroon et al 2008 ). Furthermore, several studies have shown that spider mites that perceived predator cues had a reduced oviposition rate (Oku et al 2004 ; Skaloudova et al 2007 ; Choh et al 2010 ). Whereas most of the papers cited above concentrate on one type of antipredator response, we study all these responses in one prey spider mite species exposed to cues of harmless and dangerous predators (except for diapause induction because our study animal does not enter diapause).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Antipredator behaviours of a spider mite in response to cues of dangerous and harmless predators

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Prey are known to invest in costly antipredator behaviour when perceiving cues of dangerous, but not of relatively harmless predators. Whereas most studies investigate one type of antipredator behaviour, we studied several types (changes in oviposition, in escape and avoidance behaviour) in the spider mite Tetranychus evansi in response to cues from two predatory mites. The predator Phytoseiulus longipes is considered a dangerous predator for T. evansi, whereas Phytoseiulus macropilis has a low predation rate on this prey, thus is a much less dangerous predator. Spider mite females oviposited less on leaf disc halves with predator cues than on clean disc halves, independent of the predator species. On entire leaf discs, they laid fewer eggs in the presence of cues of the dangerous predator than on clean discs, but not in the presence of cues of the harmless predator. Furthermore, the spider mites escaped more often from discs with cues of the dangerous predator than from discs without predator cues, but they did not escape more from discs with cues of the harmless predator. The spider mites did not avoid plants with conspecifics and predators. We conclude that the spider mites displayed several different antipredator responses to the same predator species, and that some of these antipredator responses were stronger with cues of dangerous predators than with cues of harmless predators.

show abstract

Predation-related odours reduce oviposition in a herbivorous mite

Cited by 30 publications

References 30 publications

Plant resistance reduces the strength of consumptive and non‐consumptive effects of predators on aphids

Plant resistance reduces the strength of consumptive and non‐consumptive effects of predators on aphids

Spider mite web mediates anti-predator behaviour

Antipredator behaviours of a spider mite in response to cues of dangerous and harmless predators

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About