Advertisement

Journal of Insect Behavior

, Volume 9, Issue 4, pp 613–642 | Cite as

Prey preferences ofPortia fimbriata, an araneophagic, web-building jumping spider (Araneae: Salticidae) from Queensland

  • Daiqin Li
  • Robert R. Jackson
Article

Abstract

Portia fimbriata from Queensland, a previously studied jumping spider (Salticidae), routinely includes web-building spiders and cursorial salticids in its diet, both of these types of prey being dangerous and unusual prey for a salticid. The present paper is the first detailed study ofP. fimbriata's prey preferences. Three basic types of tests of prey preference were used, providing evidence that (1)P. fimbriata males and females prefer spiders (both web-building spiders in webs and salticids away from webs) to insects; (2)P. fimbriata males and females prefer salticids to web-building spiders; (3)P. fimbriata males and females prefer larger spiders to smaller spiders; (4) there are intersexual differences in the preferences ofP. fimbriata for prey size, females preferring larger prey and males preferring smaller prey; and (5)P. fimbriata's prey preferences are not affected by a prior period without food of 2 weeks. When preferences were tested for by using both living, active prey and dead, motionless lures, the same preferences were expressed, indicating thatP. fimbriata can distinguish among different types of prey independent of the different movement patterns of different prey.

Key Words

Portia fimbriata jumping spiders prey preference araneophagic salticids motionless lures 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Blest, A. D., and Carter, M. (1987). Morphogenesis of a tiered principal retina and the evolution of jumping spiders.Nature 328: 152–155.Google Scholar
  2. Blest, A. D., O'Carroll, D. C., and Carter, M. (1990). Comparative ultrastructure of Layer I receptor mosaics in principal eyes of jumping spiders: The evolution of regular arrays of light guides.Cell Tissue Res. 262: 445–460.Google Scholar
  3. Bristowe, W. S. (1941).The Comity of Spiders 2; Ray Society, London.Google Scholar
  4. Coddinton, J. A., and Levi, H. W. (1991). Systematics and evolution of spiders (Araneae).Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 22: 565–592.Google Scholar
  5. Curio, E. (1976).The Ethology of Predation, Springer-Verlag, Berlin.Google Scholar
  6. Cutler, B. (1980). Ant predation byHabrocestum pulex (Hentz) (Araneae: Salticidae).Zool. Anz. 204: 97–101.Google Scholar
  7. Dill, L. M. (1975). Predatory behavior of the zebra spider,Salticus scenicus (Araneae: Salticidae).Can. J. Zool. 53: 1284–1289.Google Scholar
  8. Drees, O. (1952). Untersuchunger Über die angeborenen Verhaltensweisen bei Spingspinnen (Salticidae).Z. Tierpsychol. 9: 169–207.Google Scholar
  9. Edwards, G. B., Carroll, J. F., and Whitcomb, W. H. (1974).Stoidis aurata (Araneae: Salticidae), a spider predator of ants.Fla. Entomol. 57: 337–346.Google Scholar
  10. Foelix, R. F. (1982)Biology of Spiders, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
  11. Forster, L. M. (1982). Visual communication in jumping spiders (Araneae: Salticidae). In Witt, P. N., and Rovner, J. S. (eds.),Spider Communication: Mechanisms and Ecological Significance, Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, pp. 161–212.Google Scholar
  12. Forster, L. M. (1985). Target discrimination in jumping spiders (Araneae: Salticidae). In Barth, F. G. (ed.),Neurobiology of Arachnids, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, pp. 249–274.Google Scholar
  13. Freed, A. N. (1984). Foraging behaviour in the jumping spiderPhidippus audax: Bases for selectivity.J. Zool. Lond. 202: 49–61.Google Scholar
  14. Gardner, B. T. (1964). Hunger and sequential responses in the hunting behaviour of salticid spiders.J. Comp. Physiol. Psychol. 58: 167–173.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Givens, L. M. (1978). Dimorphic foraging strategies of a salticid spider (Phidippus audax).Ecology 59: 309–321.Google Scholar
  16. Heil, K. H. (1936). Beiträge zur Physiologie und Psychologie der Springspinnen.Z. Vergl. Physiol. 23: 1–25.Google Scholar
  17. Homann, H. (1928). Beträge zur Physiologie der Spinnenaugen. I. Untersuchungsmethoden, II. Das Sehvermöen der Salticiden.Z. Vergl. Physiol. 7: 201–268.Google Scholar
  18. Jackson, R. R. (1982). The behavior of communicating in jumping spiders (Salticidae). In Witt, P. N., and Rovner, J. S. (eds.),Spider Communication: Mechanisms and Ecological Significance: Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, pp. 213–247.Google Scholar
  19. Jackson, R. R. (1990a). Predatory versatility and intraspecific interactions ofCyrba algerina andC. ocellata, web-invading spartaeine jumping spiders (Araneae: Salticidae).N.Z. J. Zool. 17: 157–168.Google Scholar
  20. Jackson, R. R. (1990b). Predatory and silk utilisation behaviour ofGelotia sp. indet. (Araneae: Salticidae), a web-invading aggressive mimic from Sri Lanka.N. Z. J. Zool. 17: 475–482.Google Scholar
  21. Jackson, R. R. (1992). Eight-legged tricksters: Spiders that specialize in catching other spiders.BioScience 42: 590–598.Google Scholar
  22. Jackson, R. R., and Blest, A. D. (1982a). The biology ofPortia fimbriata, a web-building jumping spider (Araneae: Salticidae) from Queensland: Utilization of webs and predatory versatility.J. Zool. Lond. 196: 255–293.Google Scholar
  23. Jackson, R. R., and Blest, A. D. (1982b). The distances at which a primitive jumping spider,Portia fimbriata, makes visual discriminations.J. Exp. Biol. 97: 441–445.Google Scholar
  24. Jackson, R. R., and Hallas, S. E. A. (1986a). Comparative biology ofPortia africana, P. albimana, P. fimbriata, P. labiata, andP. schultzi, araneophagic, web-building jumping spiders (Aranene: Salticidae): Utilisation of webs, predatory versatility, and intraspecific interactions.N. Z. J. Zool. 13: 423–489.Google Scholar
  25. Jackson, R. R., and Hallas, S. E. A. (1986b). Predatory versatility and intraspecific interactions of spartaeine jumping spiders (Araneae: Salticidae):Brettus adonis, B. cingulatus, Cyrba algerina andPhaeacius spindet.N.Z. J. Zool. 13: 491–520.Google Scholar
  26. Jackson, R. R., and Tarsitano, M. S. (1993). Responses of jumping spiders to motionless prey.Bull. Br. Arachnol. Soc. 9: 105–109.Google Scholar
  27. Jackson, R. R., and van Olphen, A. (1991). Prey-capture techniques and prey preferences ofCorythalia canosa andPystira orbiculata, ant-eating jumping spiders (Araneae: Salticidae).J. Zool. Lond. 223: 577–591.Google Scholar
  28. Jackson, R. R., and van Olphen, A. (1992). Prey-capture techniques and prey preferences ofChrysilla, Natta, andSiler, ant-eating jumping spiders (Araneae: Salticidae) from Kenya and Sri Lanka.J. Zool. Lond. 227: 163–170.Google Scholar
  29. Land, M. F. (1969a). Structure of the retinae of the principal eyes of jumping spiders (Salticidae: Dendryphantinae) in relation to visual optics.J. Exp. Biol. 51: 443–470.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Land, M. F. (1969b). Movements of the retinae of jumping spiders (Salticidae) in response to visual stimuli.J. Exp. Biol. 51: 471–493.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. Land, M. F. (1971). Orientation by jumping spiders in the absence of visual feedback.J. Exp. Biol. 54: 119–139.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. Land, M. F. (1972). Stepping movements made by jumping spiders during turns mediated by the lateral eyes.J. Exp. Biol. 57: 15–40.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. Land, M. F. (1974). A comparison of the visual behavior of a predatory arthropod with that of a mammal. In Wiersma, C. A. G. (ed.),Invertebrate Neurons and Behavior, Massachusetts Institute of Technology Press, Boston, pp. 411–418.Google Scholar
  34. Nentwig, W. (1986). Non-webbuilding spiders: Prey specialists or generalists?Oecologia 69: 571–576.Google Scholar
  35. Prószyński, J. (1971). Notes on systematics of Salticidae (Arachnida: Aranei) I–VI.Ann. Zool. Warsz. 28: 227–255.Google Scholar
  36. Robinson, M. H., and Valerio, C. E. (1977). Attack on large or heavily defended prey by tropical salticid spiders.Psyche 84: 1–10.Google Scholar
  37. Sokal, R. R., and Rohlf, F. J. (1981).Biometry: The Principles of Statistics in Biological Research, Freeman, San Francisco.Google Scholar
  38. Tarsitano, M. S., and Jackson, R. R. (1992). Influence of prey movement on the performance of simple detours by jumping spiders.Behaviour 123: 106–120.Google Scholar
  39. Vollrath, F., and Parker, G. A. (1992). Sexual dimorphism and distorted sex ratios in spiders.Nature 360: 156–159.Google Scholar
  40. Wanless, F. R. (1978). A revision of the spider genusPortia (Araneae: Salticidae).Bull. Br. Mus. Nat. Hist. (Zool.) 34: 83–124.Google Scholar
  41. Wanless, F. R. (1984). A review of the spider subfamily Spartaeinae nom. n. (Araneae: Salticidae).Bull. Br. Mus. Nat. Hist. (Zool.) 45: 135–205.Google Scholar
  42. Wise, D. H. (1993).Spiders in Ecological Webs, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Publishing Corporation 1996

Authors and Affiliations

  • Daiqin Li
    • 1
  • Robert R. Jackson
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of ZoologyUniversity of CanterburyChristchurchNew Zealand

Personalised recommendations