Naturwissenschaften

, Volume 91, Issue 5, pp 245–248

Web-building spiders attract prey by storing decaying matter

  • Bojun T. Bjorkman-Chiswell
  • Melissa M. Kulinski
  • Robert L. Muscat
  • Kim A. Nguyen
  • Briony A. Norton
  • Matthew R. E. Symonds
  • Gina E. Westhorpe
  • Mark A. Elgar
Short Communication

Abstract

The orb-weaving spider Nephila edulis incorporates into its web a band of decaying animal and plant matter. While earlier studies demonstrate that larger spiders utilise these debris bands as caches of food, the presence of plant matter suggests additional functions. When organic and plastic items were placed in the webs of N. edulis, some of the former but none of the latter were incorporated into the debris band. Using an Y-maze olfactometer, we show that sheep blowflies Lucilia cuprina are attracted to recently collected debris bands, but that this attraction does not persist over time. These data reveal an entirely novel foraging strategy, in which a sit-and-wait predator attracts insect prey by utilising the odours of decaying organic material. The spider’s habit of replenishing the debris band may be necessary to maintain its efficacy for attracting prey.

References

  1. Archer MS, Elgar MA (2003) The effect of decomposition on carcass attendance in a guild of carrion-breeding flies. Med Vet Entomol 17:263–271CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Ashworth JR, Wall R (1994) Responses of the sheep blowflies Lucilia sericata and L. cuprina to odor and the development of semiochemical baits. Med Vet Entomol 8:303–309PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Bruce MJ, Herberstein ME, Elgar MA (2001) Signalling conflict between prey and predator attraction. J Evol Biol 14:786–794CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Champion de Crespigny FE, Herberstein ME, Elgar MA (2001) Food caching in orb-web spiders (Araneae: Araneoidea). Naturwissenschaften 88:42–45CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Chmiel K, Herberstein ME, Elgar MA (2000) Web damage and feeding experience influences web-site tenacity in the orb-web spider Argiope keyserlingi Karsch (Araneae: Araneidae). Anim Behav 60:821–826PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Craig CL (2003) Spiderwebs and silk. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  7. Craig CL, Bernard GD (1990) Insect attraction to ultraviolet-reflecting spider webs and web decorations. Ecology 71:616–623Google Scholar
  8. Erzinçlioglu Z (1996) Blowflies. Richmond Publishing, SloughGoogle Scholar
  9. Frouz J, Makarova OL (2001) Succession of communities of Diptera larvae in decaying fungi. Biologia 56:191–197Google Scholar
  10. Griffiths BV, Holwell GI, Herberstein ME, Elgar MA (2003) Frequency, composition and variation in external food stores constructed by orb-web spiders: Nephila edulis and Nephila plumipes (Araneae: Araneoidea). Aust J Zool 51:119–128CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Haynes KF, Yeargan KV (1999) Exploitation of intraspecific communication systems: illicit signalers and receivers. Ann Entomol Soc Am 92:960–970Google Scholar
  12. Heiling AM (1999) Why do nocturnal orb-web spiders (Araneidae) search for light? Behav Ecol Sociobiol 46:43–49CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Herberstein ME, Craig CL, Elgar MA (2000a) Foraging strategies and feeding regimes: web and decoration investment in Argiope keyserlingi Karsch (Araneae: Araneidae). Evol Ecol Res 2:69–80Google Scholar
  14. Herberstein ME, Craig CL, Coddington JA, Elgar MA (2000b) The functional significance of silk decorations of orb-web spiders: a critical review of the empirical evidence. Biol Rev 75:649–669PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Hingston RWG (1927) Protective devices in spider’s snares, with a description of seven new species of orb-weaving spiders. Proc Zool Soc Lond 28:259–293Google Scholar
  16. Lloyd NJ, Elgar MA (1997) Costs and benefits of facultative aggregating behaviour in the orb-weaving spider Gasteracantha minax Thorell (Araneae: Araneoidea). Aust J Ecol 22:256–261Google Scholar
  17. McMahan EA (1982) Bait and capture strategy of a termite-eating assassin bug. Insectes Soc 29:346–351Google Scholar
  18. Oldroyd H (1964) The natural history of flies. Weidenfeld and Nicholson, LondonGoogle Scholar
  19. Petit C, Hossaert-McKey M, Perret P, Blondel J, Lambrechts MM (2002) Blue tits use selected plants and olfaction to maintain an aromatic environment for nestlings. Ecol Lett 5:585–589CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Sandoval CP (1994) Plasticity in web design in the spider Parawixia bistriata: a response to variable prey type. Funct Ecol 8:701–707Google Scholar
  21. Uetz GW (1989) The ricochet effect and prey capture in colonial spiders. Oecologia 81:154–159Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • Bojun T. Bjorkman-Chiswell
    • 1
  • Melissa M. Kulinski
    • 1
  • Robert L. Muscat
    • 1
  • Kim A. Nguyen
    • 1
  • Briony A. Norton
    • 1
  • Matthew R. E. Symonds
    • 1
    • 2
  • Gina E. Westhorpe
    • 1
  • Mark A. Elgar
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of ZoologyUniversity of MelbourneAustralia
  2. 2.School of Tropical BiologyJames Cook UniversityTownsvilleAustralia

Personalised recommendations