Advertisement

Oecologia

, Volume 156, Issue 2, pp 249–258 | Cite as

Growth and development rates in a riparian spider are altered by asynchrony between the timing and amount of a resource subsidy

  • Laurie B. MarczakEmail author
  • John S. Richardson
Physiological Ecology - Original Paper

Abstract

Rapid growth in response to increased prey abundance may be induced by environmental variability associated with resource subsidies. Spiders living in riparian areas are subject to frequent, episodic bursts of aquatic prey (subsidies). These periods of high resource abundance may occur at different points in recipient consumers’ development through variation in emergence patterns of prey between years or across a landscape. We examine how variable timing of subsidy abundance intersects with life history scheduling to produce different growth and development outcomes for individuals within a population. Through a series of controlled feeding experiments, we tested the hypotheses that the spider Tetragnatha versicolor: (1) exhibits compensatory growth in response to subsidy variability, (2) that rapid increases in mass may result in a greater risk of mortality, and (3) that the timing of subsidy resources relative to the development schedule of this spider may produce different outcomes for individual growth patterns and adult condition. Spiders fed at very high rates grew fastest but also showed evidence of increased mortality risk during moulting. T. versicolor is capable of exhibiting strong growth compensation—individuals suffering initial growth restriction were able to catch up completely with animals on a constant diet utilising the same amount of food. Spiders that received an early pulse of resources (simulating an early arrival of an aquatic insect subsidy to riparian forests) did worse on all measures of development and fitness than spiders that received either a constant supply of food or a late pulse of resources. Importantly, receiving large amounts of food early in life appears to actually confer relative disadvantages in terms of later performance compared with receiving subsidies later in development. Subsidies may provide greater benefits to individuals or age cohorts encountering this resource abundance closer to the onset of reproductive efforts than subsidies arriving early in development.

Keywords

Aquatic–terrestrial interactions Subsidy timing Compensatory growth Life history phenology Tetragnatha versicolor 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors acknowledge assistance with rearing and feeding spiders from Kyle Bateson and Nancy Hofer; Kelly Walker assisted with the analysis of spider body compounds. Members of the Stream and Riparian Research Lab at the University of British Columbia provided valuable feedback on early versions of the manuscript. The manuscript was also substantially improved by comments from several anonymous reviewers. This project was funded in part by the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada and the Forest Sciences Program (British Columbia—Forest Investment Account). All experiments comply with current laws in Canada.

References

  1. Abrams PA, Leimar O, Nylin S, Wiklund C (1996) The effect of flexible growth rates on optimal sizes and development times in a seasonal environment. Am Nat 147:381–395CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Allen WV (1976) Biochemical aspects of lipid storage and utilization in animals. Am Zool 16:631–647Google Scholar
  3. Amalin DM, Reiskind J, McSorley R, Pena J (1999) Survival of the hunting spider Hibana velox (Araneae, Anyphaenidae), raised on different artificial diets. J Arachnol 27:692–696Google Scholar
  4. Arendt JD (1997) Adaptive intrinsic growth rates: an integration across taxa. Q Rev Biol 72:149–177CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Baxter CV, Fausch KD, Murakami M, Chapman PL (2007) Invading rainbow trout usurp a terrestrial prey subsidy from native charr and reduce their growth and abundance. Oecologia 153:461–470PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Beck CW (1997) Effect of changes in resource level on age and size at metamorphosis in Hyla squirella. Oecologia 112:187–192CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bligh EG (1959) A rapid method of total lipid extraction and purification. Can J Biochem Physiol 37:911PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Briers RA, Cariss HM, Geoghegan R, Gee JHR (2005) The lateral extent of the subsidy from an upland stream to riparian lycosid spiders. Ecography 28:165–170CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Emlet RB, Sadro SS (2006) Linking stages of life history: how larval quality translates into juvenile performance for an intertidal barnacle (Balanus glandula). Integr Comp Biol 46:334–346CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Engqvist L (2005) The mistreatment of covariate interaction terms in linear model analyses of behavioural and evolutionary ecology studies. Anim Behav 70:967–971CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Fischer K, Zeilstra I, hetz SK, Fiedler K (2004) Physiological costs of growing fast: does accelerated growth reduce pay-off in adult fitness? Evol Ecol 18:343–353CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Foelix RF (1996) Biology of spiders, 2nd edn. Oxford University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  13. Frings CS, Fendley TW, Dunn RT, Queen CA (1972) Improved determination of total serum lipids by the sulfo-phospho-vanillin reaction. Clin Chem 18:673–674PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Garcia-Berthou E (2001) On the misuse of residuals in ecology: testing regression residuals vs. the analysis of covariance. J Anim Ecol 70:708–711CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Gende SM, Willson MF (2001) Passerine densities in riparian forests of southeast Alaska: potential effects of anadromous spawning salmon. Condor 103:624–629CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hentschel BT, Emlet RB (2000) Metamorphosis of barnacle nauplii: effects of food variability and a comparison with amphibian models. Ecology 81:3495–3508CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Higgins LE, Rankin MA (2001) Mortality risk in the spider Nephila clavipes. Funct Ecol 15:24–28CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Jespersen LB, Toft S (2003) Compensatory growth following early nutritional stress in the wolf spider Pardosa prativaga. Funct Ecol 17:737–746CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Johnsson JI, Bohlin T (2005) Compensatory growth for free? a field experiment on brown trout, Salmo trutta. Oikos 111:31–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Kato C, Iwata T, Nakano S, Kishi D (2003) Dynamics of aquatic insect flux affects distribution of riparian web-building spiders. Oikos 103:113–120CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Marczak LB, Richardson JS (2007) Spiders and subsidies: results from the riparian zone of a coastal temperate rainforest. J Anim Ecol 76:687–694PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Mendelssohn IA, Kuhn NL (2003) Sediment subsidy: effects on soil-plant responses in a rapidly submerging coastal salt marsh. Ecol Eng 21:115–128CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Meredith MP, Stehman SV (1991) Repeated measures in forestry: focus on analysis of response curves. Can J For 21:957–965CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Metcalfe NB, Monaghan P (2001) Compensation for a bad start: grow now, pay later? Trends Ecol Evol 16:254–260PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Nyffeler M (1999) Prey selection of spiders in the field. J Arachnol 27:317–324Google Scholar
  26. Orr M, Zimmer M, Jelinski DE, Mews M (2005) Wrack deposition on different beach types: spatial and temporal variation in the pattern of subsidy. Ecology 86:1496–1507CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Parsons PA (2004) From energy efficiency under stress to rapid development and a long life in natural populations. Biogerontology 5:201–210PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Polis GA, Anderson WB, Holt RD (1997) Toward an integration of landscape and food web ecology: the dynamics of spatially subsidized food webs. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 28:289–316CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Polis GA, Hurd SD (1995) Extraordinarily high spider densities on islands: flow of energy from the marine to terrestrial food webs and the absence of predation. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 92:4382–4386PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Polis GA, Hurd SD (1996) Linking marine and terrestrial food webs: allochthonous input from the ocean supports high secondary productivity on small islands and coastal land communities. Am Nat 147:396–423CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Sabo JL, Power ME (2002) River-watershed exchange: effects of riverine subsidies on riparian lizards and their terrestrial prey. Ecology 83:1860–1869Google Scholar
  32. Smith CC (1976) When and how much to reproduce: the trade-off between power and efficiency. Am Zool 16:763–774Google Scholar
  33. Stockoff BA (1991) Starvation resistance of gypsy moth, Lymantria dispar (L.) (Lepidoptera: Lymantriidae): trade-offs among growth, body size and survival. Oecologia 88:422–429CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Szepanski MM, Ben-David M, Van Ballenberghe V (1999) Assessment of anadromous salmon resources in the diet of the Alexander Archipelago wolf using stable isotope analysis. Oecologia 120:327–335CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Tabachnick BG, Fidell LS (2001) Using multivariate statistics, 4th edn. Allyn and Bacon, BostonGoogle Scholar
  36. Toft S (1999) Prey choice and spider fitness. J Arachnol 27:301–307Google Scholar
  37. Twombly S (1996) Timing of metamorphosis in a freshwater crustacean: comparison with anuran models. Ecology 77:1855–1866CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Van Handel E (1985) Rapid determination of total lipids in mosquitoes. J Am Mosq Control Assoc 1:302–304PubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. Williams DD, Ambrose LG, Browning LN (1995) Trophic dynamics of two sympatric species of riparian spider (Araneae: Tetragnathidae). Can J Zool 73:1545–1553CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Wise DH (1979) Effects of an experimental increase in prey abundance upon the reproductive rates of two orb-weaving spider species (Araneae: Araneidae). Oecologia 41:289–300CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Yearsley JM, Kryriazakis I, Gordon IJ (2004) Delayed costs of growth and compensatory growth rates. Funct Ecol 18:563–570CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Forest SciencesUniversity of British ColumbiaVancouverCanada

Personalised recommendations