| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Behavioral Ecology Vol. 10 No. 5: 607-611
© 1999 International Society for Behavioral Ecology
Prey attraction as a possible function of the silk decoration of the uloborid spider Octonoba sybotides
Department of Zoology, Faculty of Science, Kyoto University, Kyoto, 606-8502, Japan
Address correspondence to T. Watanabe. E-mail: takeshi{at}ecol.zool.kyoto-u.ac.jp .
Received 4 September 1998; revised 6 March 1999; accepted 12 March 1999.
 |
ABSTRACT |
|---|
 TOP ABSTRACT INTRODUCTIONMETHODSRESULTSDISCUSSIONACKNOWLEDGEMENTSREFERENCES |
|---|
Both laboratory experiments and field observations were used to examine the prey-attraction hypothesis for the function of the silk decoration on the orb web of Octonoba sybotides. The reflectance spectrum of the decorative silk showed that the decorations reflect relatively more ultraviolet (UV) light. Choice experiments were conducted using Drosophila melanogaster, a common prey species of the spider, to determine whether webs with silk decoration attract more flies than undecorated webs. The choice experiment showed that webs with silk decoration attract more flies in light that includes UV rays. However, flies choose their flight direction randomly in light without UV rays. This suggests that the silk decoration might attract prey insects that tend to fly toward UV-reflecting objects. Field observations comparing the prey capture rate between webs with and without a silk decoration showed that more prey are caught in decorated webs. In this study, no difference between the two forms of silk decoration, linear and spiral, was detected either in prey attraction in the choice experiment or in the prey capture rate in the field observations.
Key words: choice experiment, Octonoba sybotides, prey attraction, prey capture rate, silk decoration, ultraviolet light.
|
INTRODUCTION |
|---|
|
TOPABSTRACTINTRODUCTIONMETHODSRESULTSDISCUSSIONACKNOWLEDGEMENTSREFERENCES |
|---|
Web design is an essential part of the foraging strategy of orb-web spiders. Although the orb web is made up of three fundamental elements—radial threads, frame threads, and catching spiral—some Araneid spiders are known to add silky structures to the center of their orb webs (Eberhard, 1990
;
Nentwig and Heimer, 1987). The
orb web represents a behavioral and material investment in foraging by the
spider (Eberhard, 1986). The
energetic return depends largely on the prey-capture efficiency of the web,
which is tightly related to its design, including factors such as mesh size
(width between spiral threads) and web size (area of the catching spiral)
(Eberhard, 1986;
Rypstra, 1982;
Sandoval, 1994;
Uetz et al., 1978). Recent
studies suggest that variation in orb web structure is associated with an
individual spider's allocation of energy to reproduction or prey capture
(Higgins, 1990;
Higgins and Buskirk, 1992;
Sherman, 1994). However, the
question of why spiders build web decorations, which must involve energetic
investment, has been debated for more than a century.
To date, various forms of the silk decoration, otherwise known as
stabilimenta, have been described, and several possible functions for these
silky structures have been proposed. These include adjusting web tension
(Robinson and Robinson, 1970),
strengthening the web (Robinson and
Robinson, 1970,
1973), predator avoidance
(Eberhard, 1973;
Ewer, 1972;
Lubin, 1975), and advertising
the presence of the web (Blackledge,
1998; Eisner and Nowicki,
1983; Horton,
1980). The most recent and plausible hypothesis is the
prey-attraction hypothesis (Craig and
Bernard, 1990; Tso,
1996), which the authors examined in a study of orb-weaving
spiders in the genus Argiope. They also showed that the stabilimentum silk of
some Uloboridae species reflects more ultraviolet (UV) rays than visible rays.
They suggested that the reflected light might attract prey insects that tend
to fly toward UV-reflecting objects and hence increase the prey-interception
rate of the web. No additional studies have tested the prey-attraction
hypothesis as an explanation of the function of the silk decoration on the
webs of uloborid spiders.
Octonoba sybotides is an uloborid spider that is widespread in
eastern Asia. This spider is known to add conspicuous, white, linear or spiral
silk decorations at the center of its orb web
(Watanabe, 1999;
Yoshida, 1980). Although many
O. sybotides webs have linear or spiral-shaped decorations at their
hubs, webs with a translucent disc sheet at the hub and webs without silk
decorations are also found in the field (Watanabe, unpublished data). Although
the latter two types are rarer, all four types can be observed in the same
area. The function of each type of silk decoration is not yet clear.
This study addressed two questions. (1) Do the stabilimenta of O. sybotides attract prey? (2) Does the prey-attraction hypothesis account for the different forms of stabilimenta? These questions were addressed with field observations and experiments. The prey-attraction hypothesis for the silk decoration on O. sybotides webs was examined by comparing the prey-capture rate in the field between webs with linear and spiral silk decorations and those without silk decorations. A choice experiment was also conducted to determine whether Drosophila fly to UV-reflecting silk decorations spun by O. sybotides.
|
METHODS |
|---|
|
TOPABSTRACTINTRODUCTIONMETHODSRESULTSDISCUSSIONACKNOWLEDGEMENTSREFERENCES |
|---|
Choice experiment in the laboratory
I collected mature female spiders from the Kyoto University Botanical Garden in Kyoto, Japan. The spiders were kept individually in cylindrical cases (10 cm diam, 8 cm high) and fed fruit flies. Within a few days, these spiders spun horizontal orb webs in their cases. I removed the silk decorations from the webs with a pair of tweezers under a binocular microscope and measured the reflectance spectra of the decorations alone with a Shimadzu UV-visible recording spectrophotometer UV-240, which measures wavelengths from 240 to 700 nm with an accuracy of ± 0.3 nm. The light source for the spectrophotometer was dueterium, and barium sulfate (Merck) was used for white standard.
I conducted a choice experiment similar to that of Craig and Bernard
(1990) to determine whether
fruit flies, a common natural prey insect of O. sybotides, are
attracted to UV-illuminated silk decorations. Two vinyl chloride cases, used
for keeping spiders, were connected with a T-shaped pipe (2.0 cm diam;
Figure 1). The central portions
of webs with the two forms of silk decoration, or undecorated webs, were fixed
to plastic rings 5 cm diam. The rings were placed in the cases at the opposite
ends of the T, at a 45° angle to the central connecting pipe. Light tubes
(2.0 cm diameter) were connected to the upper side of each case and focused on
the centers of the rings. I introduced a single fruit fly (Drosophila
melanogaster) through the central connecting pipe and then closed the
entrance. The species of Drosophila used for this experiment was a
species commonly caught by the spider in the field. One fly was introduced for
each trial to avoid any effect of interaction between flies, and the same fly
was never used again. The introduced fly could see both webs from the junction
of the pipes. In the next trial, the two rings with webs were switched to
eliminate site effects. After two trials, I replaced the two webs with two new
webs. Each new web was taken from a different spider. A total of 90 mature
(cephalothorax length > 1.5 mm) female spiders supplied the webs (30 each
linear, spiral, and no decoration) for the choice experiments. In the choice
experiment, I used two types of light to determine whether the UV-reflecting
property attracts prey insects; one beam contained short wavelength light
(UV-plus; without the UV filter), and the other was a control without UV
(UV-minus; eliminated UV component by the UV filter).
|
Field observations
To compare the prey capture rate between the different types of webs, I
conducted field observations from late June until late September 1998 in the
Kyoto University Botanical Garden. O. sybotides constructs a
horizontal orb web at the base of trees, or between rocks, flower pots, or
piled logs in dimly lit sites. The spiders tend to repair sections of their
web, but infrequently renew the whole web before dawn. Although the spiders
foraged both during the day and at night, they appear to be diurnal foragers
and to catch prey insects mainly during the daytime (Watanabe, personal
observation). Individual spiders build webs with linear or spiral decorations
and sometimes build undecorated webs.
I observed the number of prey trapped on the webs or consumed by the spiders at 3- to 8-day intervals. Although I did not identify individual spiders, no web was observed repeatedly because webs that had not been renewed since the previous observation could be distinguished by dust sticking to the spiral thread of the webs. Because it could not be predicted when a spider would form one of the three types of web, I randomly chose webs without silk decorations in the study area. Then one web with a linear decoration and one with a spiral decoration were surveyed within 1 m of each undecorated web. In choosing webs, I excluded those with repaired areas. Each trio of webs, an undecorated web and webs with linear and spiral decorations, was defined as an observational unit. If there were several fresh webs with decorations within 1 m of the undecorated web, the nearest ones were chosen. No web within a unit was nearer to webs in other units than to the webs in the same unit. Spiders within the same unit seemed to be in similar environments.
I identified 16-21 units every observation period and counted the number of prey captured on each web between 1430 and 1600 h. The prey interception rate (number of insects per web per census) was calculated. By using observational units, in which spiders seemed to construct webs in similar environments, site effects never biased the observations for a particular type of web. Because the daily capture rate varied greatly, I log transformed the data on prey-capture rate to normalize their distribution. I used ANOVA to compare the rate of prey capture between the three types of webs. Webs with a translucent disc sheet at the hub were not included in the analysis because of a small sample size and the difficulty in distinguishing a typical disc sheet, which varied and sometimes included a linear or spiral silk decoration. Undigested prey were removed from the webs and identified later in the laboratory.
In the study period, I also estimated the frequency of each type of O. sybotides decoration in the study area by counting all the spiders (total length > 4.0 mm; including mature and immature spiders) with identifiable web types in a monitoring area (8x1 m) in the Botanical Garden.
Because the structure of a web can affect how many insects it intercepts, I
also estimated the mesh size and catching area of each web with reference to
Sherman (1994). I measured the
major and minor diameter of the orb web (from one outermost spiral to the
opposite outermost spiral) to estimate the total web area, and also measured
two cross-diameters of the hub and surrounding nonsticky spiral zone. I
calculated the catching area of each web (total web area less the hub and
nonsticky spiral zone areas). I counted the number of spirals in each web's
two major axes and then estimated the mean mesh size.
|
RESULTS |
|---|
|
TOPABSTRACTINTRODUCTIONMETHODSRESULTSDISCUSSIONACKNOWLEDGEMENTSREFERENCES |
|---|
Choice experiments
The silk decorations reflected relatively more UV light (Figure 2). The reflectance curve was nearly flat between wavelengths of 300 and 550 nm, with a slight peak around 300 nm. The reflectance decreased at wavelengths longer than 650 nm or shorter than 250 nm.
|
The preference for decorated over undecorated was significantly different between UV-plus and UV-minus in experiments 1 and 2 (Fisher's Exact test, p <.0001, respectively). The fruitflies were more likely to choose a web with a silk decoration than an undecorated web under UV-plus light (Table 1); there was no significant difference in their preference for linear or spiral silk decorations (Table 1). Under UV-minus light, there was no significant difference in the flies' choice of webs.
|
Field observations
The data from a total of 20 days were used for the ANOVA. The daily sample
size (number of webs per census) of each type of web ranged from 16 to 21.
Identifiable prey included midges (39.2%), mosquitoes (6.8%), crane flies
(5.0%), other small (total length < 4 mm) and large (total length 4 mm)
flies (42.7%), and other insects (6.3%) including Ephemeroptera spp.,
Neuroptera spp., and Hymenoptera spp. (n = 143).
The mean prey-capture rate at the webs with decorations was much higher than
at undecorated webs (Table 2).
There was a significant difference in the mean prey-capture rate between the
three web types (ANOVA; F2, 57 = 35.942, df = 2,
p <.001). Multiple comparison showed that (1) the prey-capture
rate of the webs with a silk decoration was significantly greater than that of
the undecorated webs, and (2) there was no significant difference in the
capture rate between webs with linear and spiral silk decorations (post hoc
Scheffé's F test; linear decoration
versus no decoration, p <.001; spiral decoration versus no
decoration, p <.001; linear decoration versus spiral decoration,
p =.2611).
|
Although equal numbers of each type of web were observed to compare the prey-capture rate, the daily frequency of decorations in the study area varied greatly. The total number of webs in the monitoring area varied from 29 to 59 on 38 observation days. The mean frequency of undecorated webs was much lower than that of decorated webs: linear decoration, 57.3 ± 11.3% (mean ± SD); spiral decoration, 32.9 ± 13.7%; undecorated and others, 9.9 ± 9.5%.
The mean mesh sizes and catching areas of each type of web did not differ statistically in the 20 observations (all F ratios < 1.302, p >.15, for tests of between-day variation for all web types). Therefore, data from the 20 days were combined to compare the features of the three web types (Figure 3). ANOVA and multiple comparison tests (Scheffé's F) showed that the mesh size of webs with spiral decorations was significantly smaller than that of the other two types of web (F2, 1083 = 146.65, p <.0001). There was no statistical difference between the mesh size of the webs with a linear decoration and the undecorated webs. On the other hand, the catching areas of the webs with the spiral decoration and the undecorated webs were significantly larger than that of the webs with the linear decoration (F2, 1083 = 52.69, p <.0001).
|
|
DISCUSSION |
|---|
|
TOPABSTRACTINTRODUCTIONMETHODSRESULTSDISCUSSIONACKNOWLEDGEMENTSREFERENCES |
|---|
The results of the laboratory experiments and field observations support the prey-attraction hypothesis for the function of the silk decoration on the web of O. sybotides. Webs with a silk decoration intercepted prey insects more frequently than undecorated webs, although there was no difference in the rate of prey intercepted by webs with different types of silk decoration.
In the field, the prey species are mainly flying dipteran insects. Some
dipteran insects (mosquitoes, fruitflies, and drone flies) are known to have
photoreceptors that are very sensitive in the ultraviolet range
(Bishop, 1974;
Hu and Stark, 1977;
Muir et al., 1992). There are
several explanations for this sensitivity. UV-reflecting objects may attract
insects searching for food resources, mates, oviposition sites, or escape
routes. Insects might respond to UV light as a cue that indicates these
objects, although it is uncertain if a single mechanism attracts prey to the
web.
Craig and Bernard (1990)
showed that the catching silks of uloborid spiders also have a high UV
reflectance (see also Craig et al.,
1994). This poses a problem for the prey-attracting hypothesis,
because a UV-reflecting catching silk might enable flying insects to avoid the
web more easily. However, O. sybotides is found in the dim forest
understory. Craig et al. (1994)
showed that uloborid spiders generally forage in a diurnal forest or nocturnal
light environment. Such light conditions reduce the visibility of the catching
silks, although in dim light the effectiveness of prey attraction is also
likely to decrease. However, more light must be reflected from the silk
decoration than from the catching strings because the surface area of the
stabilimentum threads themselves, which are densely arrayed, is much greater
than the surface area of the much thinner catching strings, even though the
catching web covers a larger area. Therefore, the reflectance of the silk
decoration that attracts prey insects might decrease less than the reflectance
of the catching silk.
One alternative explanation for the differences in the prey-interception
rate between webs is the effect of web structure. Many studies suggest that
mesh size, catching area, and the visibility of the web affect the
interception of insects by webs (Craig,
1986; Rypstra,
1982; Sandoval,
1994; Uetz et al.,
1978). However, this hypothesis might be rejected in O.
sybotides because the prey-capture rate between webs with linear and with
no decorations differed. Both had similar mesh sizes, but the catching area of
undecorated webs was significantly larger than that of webs with linear
decorations. In spite of their smaller size, the webs with linear decorations
captured more prey insects than the undecorated webs. In addition, webs with a
smaller mesh must be more visible than those with a larger mesh, so that a
flying insect would be expected to avoid a web with a dense mesh more easily.
Therefore, the low prey-capture rate of an undecorated web is unlikely to
result from a difference in the visibility of the web to prey insects. Tso
(1996) also argues this
point.
If prey are attracted to decorated webs, why don't all spiders decorate
their webs? Several researchers argue that energetic constraints may limit
decorating behavior (Eberhard,
1990; Hauber,
1998; Herberstein et al.,
1997). In the field, however, O. sybotides spun
undecorated webs less frequently than those with decorations, and in the
laboratory O. sybotides that initially spun undecorated webs
subsequently added spiral or linear decorations if they were not fed
(Watanabe, personal observation). Therefore, undecorated webs might be part of
the construction process, and there may be an interlude before the decoration
is added. I cannot make any presumptions about the energetic state of the
spiders on the undecorated webs.
In this study, the prey capture rate did not differ significantly between webs with linear and spiral silk decorations. However, the mesh of webs with linear silk decorations was significantly larger than that of webs with spiral silk decorations, whereas the catching area of webs with linear decorations was significantly smaller than that of webs with spiral decorations. These structural differences should affect the quantity (number) and quality (size) of insects intercepted by the web. The energy gain of a web combines the quantity and quality of prey. The results of this study showed that there was no numerical difference in prey interception. To further examine the effect of structural differences on prey interception, it is necessary to take prey size into account and measure the qualitative difference in the intercepted prey. Further studies are needed to clarify the relationship between the form of silk decoration and the structural characteristics of webs in order to elucidate the functional significance of the decoration.
|
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS |
|---|
|
TOPABSTRACTINTRODUCTIONMETHODSRESULTSDISCUSSIONACKNOWLEDGEMENTSREFERENCES |
|---|
I am extremely grateful to M. Yoshida, T. Miyashita, T. Masumoto, and the members of the Kansai Spider Study Group for encouraging me during the early stages of my work. M. Imafuku kindly allowed me to use the spectrophotometer. I am also grateful to K. Nakata, M. Urabe, E. Honda, and S. Ishida for comments and English corrections in drafts of this paper. Thanks are also extended to members of the Laboratory of Animal Ecology, Kyoto University, for their assistance and advice.
|
REFERENCES |
|---|
|
TOPABSTRACTINTRODUCTIONMETHODSRESULTSDISCUSSIONACKNOWLEDGEMENTSREFERENCES |
|---|
Bishop LG, 1974. An ultraviolet photoreceptor in a dipteran compound eye. J Comp Physiol 91:267-275.
Blackledge TA, 1998. Stabilimentum variation and foraging success in Argiope aurantia and Argiope trifasciata (Araneae: Araneidae). J Zool 246:21-27.
Craig CL, 1986. Orb-web visibility: the influence of insect flight behaviour and visual physiology on the evolution of web designs within the Araneoidea. Anim Behav 34:54-68.
Craig CL, Bernard GD, 1990. Insect attraction to ultraviolet-reflecting spider webs and web decorations. Ecology 71:616-623.[Web of Science]
Craig CL, Bernard GD, Coddington JA, 1994. Evolutionary shifts in the spectral properties of spider silks.Evolution 48:287-296.
Eberhard WG, 1973. Stabilimenta on the webs of Uloborus diversus (Araneae: Uloboridae) and other spiders. J Zool 171:367-384.
Eberhard WG, 1986. Effect of orb-web geometry on prey interception and retention. In: Spiders: webs, behaviour, and evolution (Shear WA, ed). Stanford, California: Stanford University Press; 70-100.
Eberhard WG, 1990. Function and phylogeny of spider webs. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 21:341-372.[Web of Science]
Eisner T, Nowicki S, 1983. Spider-web protection
through visual advertisement: role of the stabilimentum.Science
219:185-187.
Ewer RF, 1972. The devices in the web of the West African spider Argiope flavipalpus. J Nat Hist 6:159-167.
Hauber ME, 1998. Web decoration and alternative foraging tactics of the spider Argiope appensa. Ethol Ecol Evol 10:47-54.
Herberstein ME, Craig CL, Elgar MA, 1997. Optimal
foraging behaviour: web investment and web decorations in Argiope
keyserlingii [abst
act]. Adv
Ethol 32:185.
Higgins LE, 1990. Variation in foraging investment during the intermolt interval and before egg-laying in the spider Nephila clavipes (Araneae: Araneidae). J Insect Behav 3:773-783.
Higgins LE, Buskirk RE, 1992. A trap-building predator exhibiting different tactics for different tactics for different aspects of foraging behaviour. Anim Behav 44:485-499.
Horton CC, 1980. A defensive function for the stabilimenta of two orb-weaving spiders (Araneae, Araneidae).Psyche 87:13-20.
Hu GG, Stark WS, 1977. Specific receptor input into spectral preference in Drosophila. J Comp Physiol 121:241-252.
Lubin YD, 1975. Stabilimenta and barrier webs in the orb webs of Argiope argentata (Araneae, Araneidae) on Daphne and Santa Cruz Islands, Galapagos. J Arachnol 2:119-126.
Muir LE, Thorne MJ, Kay BH, 1992. Aedes aegypti (Diptera: Culicidae) vision: spectral sensitivity and other perceptual parameters of the female eye. J Med Entomol 29:278-281.[Web of Science][Medline]
Nentwig W, Heimer S, 1987. Ecological aspects of spider webs. In: Ecophysiology of spiders (Nentwig W, ed). Berlin: Springer; 211-228.
Robinson MH, Robinson B, 1970. The stabilimentum of the orb web spider, Argiope argentata: an improbable defence against predators. Can Entomol 102:641-655.
Robinson MH, Robinson B, 1973. The stabilimenta of Nephila clavipes and the origins of stabilimentum building in araneids. Psyche 80:277-288.
Rypstra AL, 1982. Building a better insect trap; an experimental investigation of prey capture in a variety of spider webs.Oecologia 52:31-36.
Sandoval CP, 1994. Plasticity in web design in the spider Parawixia bistriata: a response to variable prey type.Funct Ecol 8:701-707.
Sherman PM, 1994. The orb-web: an energetic and behavioral estimator of a spider's dynamic foraging and reproductive strategies. Anim Behav 48:19-34.
Tso IM, 1996. Stabilimentum of the garden spider Argiope trifasciata: a possible prey attractant. Anim Behav 52:183-191.
Uetz GW, Johnson AD, Schemske DW, 1978. Web placement, web structure, and prey capture in orb-weaving spiders. Bull Br Arachnol Soc 4:141-148.
Watanabe T, 1999. The influence of energetic state on the form of stabilimentum built by Octonoba sybotides (Araneae: Uloboridae). Ethology 105:719-725.
Yoshida H, 1980. Six Japanese species of the genera Octonoba and Philoponella (Araneae: Uloboridae). Acta Arachnol 29:57-64.
CiteULike 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  R.-C. Cheng and I-M. Tso Signaling by decorating webs: luring prey or deterring predators? Behav. Ecol., November 1, 2007; 18(6): 1085 - 1091. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 D. Li Spiders that decorate their webs at higher frequency intercept more prey and grow faster Proc R Soc B, September 7, 2005; 272(1574): 1753 - 1757. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
A. M. Heiling, K. Cheng, and M. E. Herberstein Exploitation of floral signals by crab spiders (Thomisus spectabilis, Thomisidae) Behav. Ecol., March 1, 2004; 15(2): 321 - 326. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||