Abstract
The chemoreceptors distributed on forelegs and palps of male wolf spiders are known to be involved in intersexual chemical communication, yet their distribution pattern and relative importance are supposed. This study employed scanning electron microscopy (SEM) to determine chemoreceptor morphology and distribution pattern on male forelegs and palps of the wolf spider Pardosa astrigera. We also performed behavioral assays to determine their relative importance in intersexual chemical communication. Although the fine structure of the chemoreceptors distributed on male forelegs and palps did not differ greatly, the chemoreceptors were more widely distributed on palps relative to forelegs. When the chemoreceptors of palps were chemically ablated with zinc sulfate, male courtship latency was significantly prolonged and courtship intensity significantly suppressed as compared to those of the forelegs-ablated and/or control ones. Therefore, we conclude that the contact chemoreceptors are mostly distributed on male palps, thereby males locating their mates through dragline-mediated female pheromone.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
References
Aisenberg A, Baruffaldi L, González M (2010) Behavioral evidence of male volatile pheromones in the sex-role reversed wolf spiders, Allocosa brasiliensis and Allocosa alticeps. Naturwissenschaften 97:63–70
Andersson M (1994) Sexual selection. Monographs in behavior and ecology. Princeton University Press, Princeton
Annes L, Morse DH (2006) Line-following preferences of male crab spiders Misumena vatia. Anim Behav 71:717–724
Balakrishnan R, Pollack GS (1997) The role of antennal sensory cues in female responses to courting males in the cricket Teleogryllus oceanicus. J Exp Biol 200:511–522
Baruffaldi L, Costa FG (2010) Changes in male sexual responses from silk cues of females at different reproductive states in the wolf spider Schizocosa malitiosa. J Ethol 28:75–85
Evans TA, York Main B (1993) Attraction between social crab spiders: silk pheromones in Diaea socialis. Behav Ecol 4:99–105
Foelix RF (1970) Chemosensitive hairs in spiders. J Morphol 132:313–334
Foelix RF (1996) Biology of spiders. Oxford University Press, New York
Foelix RF, Chu-Wang I Wu (1973) The morphology of spider sensilla. II. Chemoreceptors. Tissue Cell 5:451–460
Gaskett AC (2007) Spider sex pheromones: emission, reception, structures, and functions. Biol Rev 82:27–48
Harris DJ, Mill PJ (1977a) Observations on the leg receptors of Ciniflo (Araneida: Dictynidae): I. External mechanoreceptors. J Comp Physiol 119:37–54
Harris DJ, Mill PJ (1977b) Observations on the leg receptors of Ciniflo (Araneida: Dictynidae): II. Chemoreceptors. J Comp Physiol 119:55–62
Hebets EA, Papaj DR (2005) Complex signal function: developing a framework for testable hypotheses. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 57:197–214
Hebets EA, Stratton GE, Miller GL (1996) Habitat and courtship behavior of the wolf spider, Schizocosa retrorsa. J Arachnol 24:141–147
Hostettler S, Nentwig W (2006) Olfactory information saves venom during prey-capture of the hunting spider, Cupiennius salei (Araneae: Ctenidae). Funct Ecol 20:369–375
Huber BA (2005) Sexual selection research on spiders: progress and biases. Biol Rev 80:363–385
Jackson RR, Clark RJ, Harland DP (2002) Behavioral and cognitive influences of kairomones on an araneophagic jumping spider. Behaviour 139:749–775
Papke M, Riechert SE, Schulz S (2001) An airborne female pheromone associated with male attraction and courtship in a desert spider. Anim Behav 61:877–886
Persons MH, Rypstra AL (2001) Wolf spiders show graded antipredator behavior in the presence of chemical cues from different sized predators. J Chem Ecol 27:2493–2504
Persons MH, Uetz GW (1996) Wolf spiders vary patch residence time in the presence of chemical cues from prey. J Arachnol 24:76–79
Persons MH, Walker SE, Rypstra AL, Marshall SD (2001) Wolf spider predator avoidance tactics and survival in the presence of diet-associated predator cues. Anim Behav 61:43–51
Persons MH, Walker SE, Rypstra AL (2002) Fitness costs and benefits of antipredator behavior mediated by chemotactile cues in the wolf spider, Pardosa milvina. Behav Ecol 13:386–392
Punzo F, Kukoyi O (1997) The effects of prey chemical cues on patch residence time in the wolf spider, Trochosa parthenus and the lynx spider, Oxyopes salticus Hentz. Bull Br Arachnol Soc 10:323–326
Roberts JA, Uetz GW (2004a) Species-specificity of chemical signals: silk source affects discrimination in a wolf spider (Araneae, Lycosidae). J Insect Behav 17:477–491
Roberts JA, Uetz GW (2004b) Chemical signaling in a wolf spider: a test of ethospecies discrimination. J Chem Ecol 30:1271–1284
Roberts JA, Uetz GW (2005) Information content of female chemical signals in a wolf spider, Schizocosa ocreata: male discrimination of reproductive state and receptivity. Anim Behav 70:217–223
Ryan KM, Sakaluk SK (2009) Dulling the senses: the role of the antennae in mate recognition, copulation and mate guarding in decorated crickets. Anim Behav 77:1345–1350
Rypstra AL, Wieg C, Walker SE, Persons MH (2003) Mutual mate assessment in wolf spiders: differences in the cues used by males and females. Ethology 109:315–325
Schonewolf KW, Bell R, Rypstra AL, Persons MH (2006) Field evidence of an airborne enemy-avoidance kairomone in wolf spiders. J Chem Ecol 32:1565–1576
Schulz S (2004) Semiochemistry of spiders. In: Cardé RT, Millar JG (eds) Advances in insect chemical ecology, vol 1. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, p 110
Searcy LE, Rypstra AL, Persons MH (1999) Airborne chemical communication in the wolf spider, Pardosa milvina. J Chem Ecol 25:2527–2533
Tichy H, Gingl E, Ehn R, Papke M, Schulz S (2001) Female sex pheromone of a wandering spider, Cupiennius salei: identification and sensory reception. J Comp Physiol A 187:75–78
Tietjen WJ (1977) Dragline-following by male lycosid spiders. Psyche 84:165–178
Tietjen WJ, Rovner JS (1980) Trail-following behavior in two species of wolf spiders: sensory and ethol-ecological concomitants. Anim Behav 28:735–741
Tietjen WJ, Rovner JS (1982) Chemical communication in lycosids and other spiders. In: Witt PN, Ronver JS (eds) Spider communication mechanisms and ecological significance. Princeton University Press, Princeton, pp 249–279
Uetz GW, Roberts JA (2002) Multisensory cues and multimodal communication in spiders: insights from video/audio playback studies. Brain Behav Evol 59:222–230
Wu J, Jiao XG, Chen J, Peng Y, Liu FX (2007) Behavioral evidence for a sex pheromone in female wolf spider, Pardosa astrigera. Acta Zool Sin 53:994–999
Wu J, Jiao XG, Chen J, Peng Y, Liu FX (2008) Courtship and mating of the wolf spider, Pardosa astrigera. Chin J Zool 43:9–12
Zhao JZ (1993) Spiders in the cotton fields in China. Wuhan Press, Wuhan
Acknowledgments
We thank Daiqin Li and two anonymous reviewers for their helpful comments and suggestions on this manuscript. Financial assistance was provided by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (30800121).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Jiao, X., Chen, Z., Du, H. et al. Chemoreceptors distribution and relative importance of male forelegs and palps in intersexual chemical communication of the wolf spider Pardosa astrigera . Chemoecology 21, 45–49 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00049-010-0062-2
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00049-010-0062-2