Zoomorphology

, Volume 133, Issue 2, pp 205–215 | Cite as

Evidence suggests that modified setae of the crab spiders Stephanopis spp. fasten debris from the background

Original Paper

Abstract

Crab spiders (Thomisidae) are known by their ability to change their body colouration via change in epithelial pigments. However, the crab spider genus Stephanopis appears to match the colouration of the bark they are sitting on by having debris attached to its dorsal cuticle. The functional morphology, colouration, and evolution of this phenomenon were investigated in Stephanopis cf. scabra and S. cambridgei. Analysis under the microscope revealed that debris originated from the bark they were sitting on. Using scanning electron microscopy, three different types of setae likely related in the retention of debris were found in S. cf. scabra and one in S. cambridgei. These setae are branched and possess barbs, unlike the more filiform setae found in other crab spider species. In addition, the presence of debris improved the brightness background matching of spiders against the bark, but not hue and chroma matching. Ancestral character state reconstruction suggested that presence of debris evolved two to three times within Thomisidae. The evolution of both masking and colour change among crab spiders indicates that they are under a strong selection to avoid detection.

Keywords

Masking Camouflage Thomisidae Background matching Crypsis 

Notes

Acknowledgments

Author would like to thank Marie E. Herberstein for guidance and comments on this manuscript; Matthew Bulbert, James O’Hanlon, Marie E. Herberstein, Jasmin Ruch, and Olga Kazakova for helping with the collection of crab spiders; Debra Birch, Nicole Vella, and Scott Fabricant for support and guidance during the SEM imaging; Anne Wignall, Dinesh Rao, Isabel Waga, and anonymous reviewers for comments on this manuscript; and Macquarie University and the Joyce W. Vickery Scientific Research Fund of The Linnean Society of New South Wales for financial support.

Supplementary material

435_2013_213_MOESM1_ESM.pdf (12.7 mb)
Supplementary material 1 (PDF 13039 kb)
435_2013_213_MOESM2_ESM.pdf (9.2 mb)
Supplementary material 2 (PDF 9455 kb)
435_2013_213_MOESM3_ESM.pdf (11.6 mb)
Supplementary material 3 (PDF 11909 kb)
435_2013_213_MOESM4_ESM.pdf (13.7 mb)
Supplementary material 4 (PDF 14041 kb)
435_2013_213_MOESM5_ESM.pdf (11.2 mb)
Supplementary material 5 (PDF 11491 kb)
435_2013_213_MOESM6_ESM.pdf (8.9 mb)
Supplementary material 6 (PDF 9156 kb)
435_2013_213_MOESM7_ESM.pdf (50.3 mb)
Supplementary material 7 (PDF 51536 kb)
435_2013_213_MOESM8_ESM.pdf (4.1 mb)
Supplementary material 8 (PDF 4208 kb)

References

  1. Andersson S, Pryke SR, Örnborg J, Lawes MJ, Andersson M (2002) Multiple receivers, multiple ornaments, and a trade-off between agonistic and epigamic signalling in a widowbird. Am Nat 160:683–691PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Barth FG (2002) A spider’s world: senses and behaviour. Springer, BerlinCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Benjamin SP (2011) Phylogenetics and comparative morphology of crab spiders (Araneae: Dionycha, Thomisidae). Zootaxa 3080:1–108Google Scholar
  4. Benjamin SP, Dimitrov D, Gillespie RG, Hormiga G (2008) Family ties: molecular phylogeny of crab spiders (Araneae: Thomisidae). Cladistics 24:1–15CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Brandt M, Mahsberg D (2002) Bugs with a backpack: the function of nymphal camouflage in the West African assassin bugs Paredocla and Acanthaspis spp. Anim Behav 63:277–284CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Brechbühl R, Casas J, Bacher S (2009) Ineffective crypsis in a crab spider: a prey community perspective. Proc R Soc B Biol Sci 277:739. doi: 10.1098/rspb.2009.1632 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cambridge OP (1869) Descriptions and sketches of some new species of Araneidea, with characters of a new genus. Ann Mag Nat Hist 3:52–74CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Chittka L (1992) The colour hexagon: a chromaticity diagram based on photoreceptor excitations as a generalized representation of colour opponency. J Comp Physiol A Sens Neural Behav Physiol 170:533–543Google Scholar
  9. Cott H (1966) Adaptive coloration in animals. Methuen, LondonGoogle Scholar
  10. Dettner K, Liepert C (1994) Chemical mimicry and camouflage. Annu Rev Entomol 39:129–154CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Duncan RP, Autumn K, Binford GJ (2007) Convergent setal morphology in sand-covering spiders suggests a design principle for particle capture. Proc R Soc B Biol Sci 274:3049–3057. doi: 10.1098/rspb2007.1039 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Foelix RF (1996) Biology of spiders. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  13. Gabritschevsky E (1927) Experiments on color changes and regeneration in the crab-spider, Misumena vatia. J Exp Zool 42:117–267Google Scholar
  14. Gawryszewski FM (2011) Chapter 5—The evolution of UV reflectance in Australian crab spiders (Thomisidae). PhD Thesis, Macquarie University, AustraliaGoogle Scholar
  15. Hölldobler B, Wilson EO (1986) Soil-binding pilosity and camouflage in ants of the tribes Basicerotini and Stegomyrmecini (Hymenoptera, Formicidae). Zoomorphology 106:12–20. doi: 10.1007/BF00311942 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Jackson RR, Pollard SD (2007) Bugs with backpacks deter vision-guided predation by jumping spiders. J Zool 273:358–363CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Koch L (1874) Die Arachniden Australiens. Bauer und Raspe, Nurnberg, pp 473–576Google Scholar
  18. Lise AA (1981) Tomisídeos neotropicais V. Revisão do gênero Onocolus SIMON, 1895 (Araneae, Thomisidae, Stephanopsinae). Iheringia 57:3–98Google Scholar
  19. Maddison WP, Maddison DR (2011) Mesquite: a modular system for evolutionary analysis. Version 2.75 http://mesquiteproject.org
  20. Mascord R (1970) Australian spiders in colour. AH and AW REED, SydneyGoogle Scholar
  21. Montgomerie R (2006) Analysing colors. In: Hill GE, McGraw KJ (eds) Bird coloration: mechanism and measurements. Harvard University Press, London, pp 90–147Google Scholar
  22. Ocean Optics Inc (2005) USB2000 Installation and Operation Manual. pp 24–25Google Scholar
  23. Ono H (1988) A revisional study of the spider family Thomisidae (Arachnida, Araneae) of Japan. National Science Museum, TokyoGoogle Scholar
  24. Packard A (1905) Change of color and protective coloration in a flower-spider (Misumena vatia Thorell). J N Y Entomol Soc 13:85–96Google Scholar
  25. Platnick N, Forster R (1993) A revision of the New Caledonian spider genus Bradystichus (Araneae, Lycosoidea). Am Mus Novit 3075:1–14Google Scholar
  26. Rainbow WJ (1893) Descriptions of some new Araneidae of New South Wales. No. 1. Proc Linnean Soc NSW 7(4):71–476Google Scholar
  27. Raven R, Platnick N (1981) A revision of the American spiders of the family Microstigmatidae (Araneae, Mygalomorphae). Am Mus Novit 2707:1–20Google Scholar
  28. Roth V (1984) The spider family Homalonychidae (Arachnida, Araneae). Am Mus Novit 2790:1–11Google Scholar
  29. Ruxton GD (2009) Non-visual crypsis: a review of the empirical evidence for camouflage to senses other than vision. Philos Trans R Soc B 364:549–557CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Stevens M, Merilaita S (2009) Animal camouflage: current issues and new perspectives. Philos Trans R Soc B 364:423–427CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Thery M (2007) Colours of background reflected light and of the prey’s eye affect adaptive coloration in female crab spiders. Anim Behav 73:797–804CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Thery M, Casas J (2009) The multiple disguises of spiders: web colour and decorations, body colour and movement. Philos Trans R Soc B Biol Sci 364:471–480CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Vorobyev M, Osorio D (1998) Receptor noise as a determinant of colour thresholds. Philos Trans R Soc B Biol Sci 265:351–358CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Weirauch C (2006) Anatomy of disguise: camouflaging structures in nymphs of some Reduviidae (Heteroptera). Am Mus Novit 3542:1–18CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Wicksten MK (1978) Attachment of decorating materials in Loxorhynchus crispatus (Brachyura: Majidae). Trans Am Microsc Soc 97:217–220CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Wicksten MK (1993) A review and a model of decorating behavior in spider crabs (Decapoda, Brachyura, Majidae). Crustaceana 64:314–325CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Zuur AF, Ieno EN, Walker NJ, Saveliev AA, Smith GS (2009) Mixed effects models and extensions in ecology with R. Springer, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Biological SciencesMacquarie UniversityNorth RydeAustralia

Personalised recommendations