Cooperative prey capture by young subsocial spiders: II. Behavioral mechanism

Kim, Kil Won; Krafft, Bertrand; Choe, Jae Chun

doi:10.1007/s00265-005-0014-y

Cited by 26 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 37 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The concentration of origins of sociality in the maternal care clade supports the long-held view that extended maternal care and subsociality preadapt spiders for sociality (e.g., Kullmann 1972;Krafft 1979;Aviles 1997;Schneider 2002;Agnarsson 2004;Kim et al 2005). Sociality in other taxa, for example in the Aculeate Hymenoptera, is also presumed to have evolved via maternal care and subsociality (e.g., Wilson 1975;Linksvayer and Wade 2005).…”

Section: Phylogenetics and The Multiple Origins Of Spider Socialitymentioning

confidence: 57%

Sociality in Theridiid Spiders: Repeated Origins of an Evolutionary Dead End

Agnarsson¹,

Avilés²,

Coddington³

et al. 2006

Evol

125

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract.•Evolutionary ' 'dead ends" result from traits that are selectively advantageous in the short term but ultimately result in lowered diversification rates of lineages. In spiders, 23 species scattered across eight families share a social system in which individuals live in colonies and cooperate in nest maintenance, prey capture, and brood care. Most of these species are inbred and have highly female-biased sex ratios. Here we show that in Theridiidae this social system originated eight to nine times independently among 11 to 12 species for a remarkable 18 to 19 origins across spiders. In Theridiidae, the origins cluster significantly in one clade marked by a possible preadaptation: extended maternal care. In most derivations, sociality is limited to isolated species: social species are sister to social species only thrice. To examine whether sociality in spiders represents an evolutionary dead end, we develop a test that compares the observed phylogenetic isolation of social species to the simulated evolution of social and non-social clades under equal diversification rates, and find that sociality in Theridiidae is significantly isolated. Because social clades are not in general smaller than their nonsocial sister clades, the "spindly" phylogenetic pattern•many tiny replicate social clades•may be explained by extinction rapid enough that a nonsocial sister group does not have time to diversify while the social lineage remains extant. In this case, this repeated origin and extinction of sociality suggests a conflict between the short-term benefits and long-term costs of inbred sociality. Although benefits of group living may initially outweigh costs of inbreeding (hence the replicate origins), in the long run the subdivision of the populations in relatively small and highly inbred colony lineages may result in higher extinction, thus an evolutionary dead end.

show abstract

Section: Phylogenetics and The Multiple Origins Of Spider Socialitymentioning

confidence: 57%

Sociality in Theridiid Spiders: Repeated Origins of an Evolutionary Dead End

Agnarsson¹,

Avilés²,

Coddington³

et al. 2006

Evol

125

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Mechanisms of foraging facilitation also vary. They include an increased ability of larger groups to (i) locate food, (ii) capture (more agile) and overrule (larger or more dangerous) prey, (iii) increase hunting success and reduce energy expenditure during pursuit and vanquishing, (iv) protect any of its members more effectively from predation, and thus devote more time to foraging, (v) prevent kleptoparasites from stealing already subdued prey, (vi) gain better access to food defended by other species, or (vii) break up potential protective groupings of their prey (Marsh and Ribbink, 1986;Bednarz, 1988;Cosner et al, 1999;Courchamp and Macdonald, 2001;Krause and Ruxton, 2002;Gardner, 2004;Kim et al, 2005aKim et al, , 2005b. For example, tropical insectivorous birds move in a group to flush out insects, and thereby facilitate individuals' feeding (Clayton, 1978), some species of tuna forage in a linear school and aggregate when a school of prey is encountered (Partridge et al, 1983), and aggregations of herbivorous insects can overwhelm induced chemical defenses in host plants (Berryman et al, 1985;Denno and Benrey, 1997).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Impacts of Foraging Facilitation Among Predators on Predator-prey Dynamics

Berec

2009

Bull. Math. Biol.

132

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Whereas impacts of predator interference on predator-prey dynamics have received considerable attention, the "inverse" process-foraging facilitation among predators-have not been explored yet. Here we show, via mathematical models, that impacts of foraging facilitation on predator-prey dynamics depend on the way this process is modeled. In particular, foraging facilitation destabilizes predator-prey dynamics when it affects the encounter rate between predators and prey. By contrast, it might have a stabilizing effect if the predator handling time of prey is affected. Foraging facilitation is an Allee effect mechanism among predators and we show that for many parameters, it gives rise to a demographic Allee effect or a critical predator density in need to be crossed for predators to persist. We explore also the effects of predator interference, to make the picture "symmetric" and complete. Predator interference is shown to stabilize predator-prey dynamics once its strength is not too high, and thus corroborates results of others. On the other hand, there is a wide range of model parameters for which predator interference gives rise to three co-occurring co-existence equilibria. Such a multi-equilibrial regime is rather robust as we observe it for all the functional response types we explore. This is a previously unreported phenomenon which we show cannot occur for the Beddington-DeAngelis functional response. An interesting topic for future research thus might be to seek for general conditions on predator functional responses that would produce multiple co-existence equilibria in a predator-prey model.

show abstract

“…We hesitate to say what happens is cooperative, as using the term 'cooperative' suggests that two or more animals act in harmony with each other in the achieving of a mutually beneficial outcome (Packer and Ruttan 1988). However, for Portia, as for many spiders, often this term might be misleading, with it being more appropriate to characterise feeding together on the same prey as being a consequence of competitors achieving a reluctant truce (see: Amir et al 2000;Jackson 1979;Kim et al 2005;Vanacker et al 2004;Whitehouse and Jackson 1998).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 94%

Attending to detail by communal spider-eating spiders

Jackson

Nelson

2012

Anim Cogn

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Communal predators may often need to make especially intricate foraging decisions, as a predator's success may depend on the actions of its neighbours. Here,we consider the decisions made by Portia africana, a jumping spider (Salticidae) that preys on other spiders, including Oecobius amboseli (Oecobiidae), a small prey spider that lives under small sheets of silk (nests) on the walls of buildings. P. africana juveniles settle near oecobiid nests and then ambush oecobiids as they leave or enter the nest. Two or more P. africana juveniles sometimes settle at the same nest and, when an oecobiid is captured, the P. africana juveniles may share the meal. We investigated the joining decisions made by naïve P. africana juveniles. Experiments were based on using lures (dead spiders positioned in lifelike posture) arranged in a series of 17 different scenes defined by the presence/absence of a nest, the lure types present and the configuration of the lures and the nest. Our findings imply that P. africana juveniles make remarkably precise predatory decisions, with the variables that matter including whether a nest is present, the identity of spiders inside and outside a nest and how spiders are positioned relative to each other and the nest.

show abstract

Cooperative prey capture by young subsocial spiders: II. Behavioral mechanism

Cited by 26 publications

References 37 publications

Sociality in Theridiid Spiders: Repeated Origins of an Evolutionary Dead End

Sociality in Theridiid Spiders: Repeated Origins of an Evolutionary Dead End

Impacts of Foraging Facilitation Among Predators on Predator-prey Dynamics

Attending to detail by communal spider-eating spiders

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About