The use of serology in evaluating invertebrate prey-predator relationships : a review

Abstract

Several methods, including the use of seralogy, are available for evaluating prey-predator relationships. Two basic methods involving precipitation and agglutination reactions have been utilised, both of which depend on the production of specific antisera with high titres. A critical account is presented of methods of preparing an'tisera, with particular reference to the amount of antigen required, the route of inoculation and testing antisera, together with a review of the five precipitation and two agglutination techniques available. The main limitations of A 1 7 2 p -F -L -BOREHAM and C. E. OHIAGU serological methods are the specificity of the arttisera and the difficulties in quantifying results unless assumptions are made as to the number of prey eaten at each feed. Details of studies employing serological techniques to identify the predators of specific prey and the food of invertebrates are given in two tables. The value of serological techniques is discussed in relation to the ecology of invertebrates by considering, as examples, the insect fauna on broom (Sarothamnus scoparius), predation of mosquitoes and the food of triclads. Errors in the quantification of predation may occur by including positive reactions resulting from carrion feeding or material ingested accidentally on plants by phytophagous arthropods.

Use of an ELISPOT immunoassay to detect euphausiid predation on larval anchovy

“…The serum also did not cross-react with white sea bass Atactoscion nobilis yolk protein but did cross-react with egg yolk from the sardine Sardinops sagax, indicating that the serum may not discriminate between clupeoid yolk proteins in general. This cross-reaction could perhaps be removed by absorption (Boreham & Ohiagu 1978). As live fish eggs become available, we will determine the ability of the antibody to discriminate between teleosts.…”

“…Because Crustacea macerate their prey, it is impossible to visually identify larval remains in the stomachs of wild Crustacea. Two possible solutions to this problem are to use larval eye lenses to identify the larval remains (Purcell 1984) or to use immunoassays designed to detect species-specific proteins (Boreham & Ohiagu 1978, Calver 1984. Here we evaluate the use of an immunoassay to detect larval northern anchovy EngrauLis mordax remains in euphausiid Euphausia pacifica stomachs.…”

“…Boreham & Ohiagu (1978) reviewed and evaluated studies that used serological techniques to describe invertebrate (mainly economically important insects) predator-prey relations and predation rates. Feller et al (1979) applied serological techniques to describe food web relations in a benthic community.…”

Untitled

“…Ecologists have used a variety of immunological methods to study predation. [1][2][3][4][5][6][7] The methods are based on the common principle that antibodies raised in rabbits against predated species can be used to detect antigens of that species in the gut contents of predators. In determining the predatory role of backswimmers against mosquito larvae and pupae, serum obtained from rabbits hyperimmunized with antigens of mosquito larvae and pupae were used to probe for the mosquito larvae and pupae within the bodies of the backswimmers.…”

“…Serological techniques for studying predator and prey relationships have previously been studied. [1][2][3][4][5][6][7] This paper reports the possibility of using an immunodiffusion technique as a tool for detecting mosquito larval and pupal antigens in the body of potentially predacious animals. The experiment was done using backswimmers, Notonecta sp., a general predator with the larvae and pupae of Aedes aegypti and Culex quinquefasciatus in a predatormosquito model system.…”