Advertisement

Animal Cognition

, Volume 18, Issue 1, pp 307–314 | Cite as

Nephila clavipes spiders (Araneae: Nephilidae) keep track of captured prey counts: testing for a sense of numerosity in an orb-weaver

  • Rafael L. Rodríguez
  • R. D. Briceño
  • Eduardo Briceño-Aguilar
  • Gerlinde Höbel
Original Paper

Abstract

Nephila clavipes golden orb-web spiders accumulate prey larders on their webs and search for them if they are removed from their web. Spiders that lose larger larders (i.e., spiders that lose larders consisting of more prey items) search for longer intervals, indicating that the spiders form memories of the size of the prey larders they have accumulated, and use those memories to regulate recovery efforts when the larders are pilfered. Here, we ask whether the spiders represent prey counts (i.e., numerosity) or a continuous integration of prey quantity (mass) in their memories. We manipulated larder sizes in treatments that varied in either prey size or prey numbers but were equivalent in total prey quantity (mass). We then removed the larders to elicit searching and used the spiders’ searching behavior as an assay of their representations in memory. Searching increased with prey quantity (larder size) and did so more steeply with higher prey counts than with single prey of larger sizes. Thus, Nephila spiders seem to track prey quantity in two ways, but to attend more to prey numerosity. We discuss alternatives for continuous accumulator mechanisms that remain to be tested against the numerosity hypothesis, and the evolutionary and adaptive significance of evidence suggestive of numerosity in a sit-and-wait invertebrate predator.

Keywords

Cognitive ecology Counting Food hoarding Nephila Web spider 

Notes

Acknowledgments

We thank Marielos Aguilar and Adrián Briceño for excellent hospitality and help with experiments. This work benefitted from stimulating discussions with Giby Barrantes, Bill Eberhard, Ignacio Escalante, and the 170 Entomology Seminar at the University of Costa Rica. Ken Cheng, Linda Whittingham, and two anonymous reviewers provided constructive comments on the manuscript. This research was funded in part by a UWM Graduate School Committee Award to RLR.

Supplementary material

Nephila clavipes female accumulating a prey larder at the hub of her web. This spider has already accumulated a 3-prey larder and is in the process of wrapping and securing a fourth prey item to the hub of her web before settling down to feed. (MPG 2002 kb)

Nephila clavipes female searching for lost prey. This spider is in the middle of searching for prey that was experimentally removed from the hub of her web. (MPG 2171 kb)

References

  1. Agrillo C, Dadda M, Serena G, Bisazza A (2008) Do fish count? Spontaneous discrimination of quantity in female mosquitofish. Anim Cogn 11:495–503PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Baltzer F (1924) Beiträge zur Sinnesphysiologie und Psychologie der Webespinnen. Naturwissenschaften 45:940–941Google Scholar
  3. Bar-Shai N, Keasar T, Shmida A (2011) The use of numerical information by bees in foraging tasks. Behav Ecol 22:317–325CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bensom-Amram S, Heinen VK, Dryer SL, Holekamp KE (2011) Numerical assessment and individual call discrimination by wild spotted hyaenas, Crocuta crocuta. Anim Behav 82:743–752CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Beran MJ (2008) Monkeys (Macaca mulatta and Cebus apella) track, enumerate, and compare multiple sets of moving items. J Exp Psychol [Anim Behav] 34:63–74CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bjorkman-Chiswell BT, Kulinski MM, Muscat RL, Nguyen KA, Norton BA, Symonds MRE, Westhorpe GE, Elgar MA (2004) Web-building spiders attract prey by storing decaying matter. Naturwissenschaften 91:245–248PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bogale BA, Kamata N, Mioko K, Sugita S (2011) Quantity discrimination in jungle crows, Corvus macrorhynchos. Anim Behav 82:635–641CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Brannon EM, Cantlon JF (2009) A comparative perspective on the origin of numerical thinking. In: Tommasi L, Peterson MA, Nadel L (eds) Cognitive biology: evolutionary and developmental perspectives on mind, brain, and behavior. MIT Press, Massachusetts, pp 191–219CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Brannon EM, Roitman JD (2003) Nonverbal representations of time and number in animals and human infants. In: Meck WH (ed) Functional and neural mechanisms of interval timing. Methods and new frontiers in neuroscience. CRC Press, Boca Raton, pp 143–182Google Scholar
  10. Braver SL, Thoemmes FJ, Rosenthal R (2014) Continuously cumulating meta-analysis and replicability. Perspect Psychol Sci 9:333–342CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Buckingham JN, Wong BBM, Rosenthal GG (2007) Shoaling decisions in female swordtails: how do fish gauge group size? Behaviour 144:1333–1346CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Burnham KP, Andersson DR (2002) Model selection and multimodel inference: a practical information-theoretic approach, 2nd edn. Springer, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  13. Burr D, Ross J (2008) A visual sense of number. Curr Biol 18:425–428PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Cantlon JF, Brannon EM (2006) Shared system for ordering small and large numbers in monkeys and humans. Psychol Sci 17:401–406PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Carazo P, Font E, Forteza-Behrendt E, Desfilis E (2009) Quantity discrimination in Tenebrio molitor: evidence of numerosity discrimination in an invertebrate? Anim Cogn 12:463–470PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Champion de Crespigny FE, Herberstein ME, Elgar MA (2001) Food caching in orb-web spiders (Araneae: Araneoidea). Naturwissenschaften 88:42–45PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Dacke M, Srinivasan MV (2008) Evidence for counting in insects. Anim Cogn 11:683–689PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Dehaene S (1997) The number sense. Oxford University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  19. Ferkin MH, Pierce AA, Sealand RO, delBarco-Trillo J (2005) Meadow voles, Microtus pennsylvanicus, can distinguish more over-marks from fewer over-marks. Anim Cogn 8:182–189PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Franks NR, Dornhaus A, Metherell BG, Nelson TR, Lanfear SAJ, Symes WS (2006) Not everything that counts can be counted: ants use multiple metrics for a single nest trait. Proc R Soc B 273:165–169PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Gallistel CR, Gelman R (2000) Non-verbal numerical cognition: from reals to integers. Trends Cogn Sci 4:59–65PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 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
  23. Hauser MD, Tsao F, Garcia P, Spelke ES (2003) Evolutionary foundations of number: spontaneous representation of numerical magnitudes by cotton-top tamarins. Proc R Soc Lond B 270:1441–1446CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Healy SD, Rowe C (2010) Information processing: the ecology and evolution of cognitive abilities. In: Westneat DF, Fox CW (eds) Evolutionary behavioral ecology. Oxford University Press, New York, pp 162–174Google Scholar
  25. Jones SM, Pearson J, DeWind NK, Paulsen D, Tenekedjieva A-M, Brannon EM (2014) Lemurs and macaques show similar numerical sensitivity. Anim Cogn 17:503–515PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Kitchen DM, Beehner JC (2007) Factors affecting individual participation in group-level aggression among non-human primates. Behaviour 144:1551–1581CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. LeGuelte L (1969) Learning in spiders. Am Zool 9:145–152PubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. McComb K, Packer C, Pusey A (1994) Roaring and numerical assessment in contests between groups of female lions, Panthera leo. Anim Behav 47:379–387CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Nakagawa S, Cuthill IC (2007) Effect size, confidence interval and statistical significance: a practical guide for biologists. Biol Rev 82:591–605PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Nelson XJ, Jackson RR (2012) The role of numerical competence in a specialized predatory strategy of an araneophagic spider. Anim Cogn 15:699–710PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Nentwig W (1985) Prey analysis of four species of tropical orb-weaving spiders (Araneae:Araneidae) and a comparison with araneids of the temperate zone. Oecologia 66:580–594CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Opell BD (2001) Egg sac recognition by female Miagrammopes animotus (Araneae, Uloboridae). J Arachnol 29:244–248CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Pepperberg IM (2006) Grey parrot numerical competence. Anim Cogn 9:377–391PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Reznikova Z, Ryabko B (2011) Numerical competence in animals, with an insight from ants. Behaviour 148:405–434CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Robinson MH, Mirick H (1971) The predatory behavior of the golden-web spider Nephila clavipes (Araneae: Araneidae). Psyche 78:123–139CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Rodríguez RL, Gamboa E (2000) Memory of captured prey in three web spiders (Araneae: Araneidae, Linyphiidae, Tetragnathidae). Anim Cogn 3:91–97CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Rodríguez RL, Gloudeman MD (2011) Estimating the repeatability of memories of captured prey formed by Frontinella communis spiders (Araneae: Linyphiidae). Anim Cogn 14:675–682PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Rodríguez RL, Kolodziej RC, Höbel G (2013) Memory of prey larders in golden orb-web spiders, Nephila clavipes. Behaviour 150:1345–1356Google Scholar
  39. Rosenthal R (1994) Parametric measures of effect size. In: Cooper H, Hedges L (eds) The handbook of research synthesis. Russell Sage Foundation, New York, pp 231–244Google Scholar
  40. Rysptra AL (1981) The effect of kleptoparasitism on prey consumption and web relocation in a Peruvian population of the spider Nephila clavipes. Oikos 37:179–182CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Scarf D, Hayne H, Colombo M (2011) Pigeons on par with primates in numerical competence. Science 334:1664PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Schmitt V, Fischer J (2011) Representational format determines numerical competence in monkeys. Nature Communications 2:257PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Shadish WR, Haddock CK (1994) Combining estimates of effect size. In: Cooper H, Hedges L (eds) The handbook of research synthesis. Russell Sage Foundation, New York, pp 261–281Google Scholar
  44. Shettleworth SJ (2010) Cognition, evolution, and behavior, 2nd edn. Oxford University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  45. Sokal RR, Rohlf FJ (1995) Biometry, 3rd edn. WH Freeman and Company, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  46. Venner S, Casas J (2005) Spider webs designed for rare but life-saving catches. Proc R Soc B 272:1587–1592PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Wilson ML, Hauser MD, Wrangham RW (2001) Does participation in intergroup conflict depend on numerical assessment, range location, or rank for wild chimpanzees? Anim Behav 61:1203–1216CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Wilson ML, Britton NF, Franks NR (2002) Chimpanzees and the mathematics of battle. Proc R Soc Lond B 269:1107–1112CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Rafael L. Rodríguez
    • 1
    • 2
  • R. D. Briceño
    • 2
  • Eduardo Briceño-Aguilar
    • 2
  • Gerlinde Höbel
    • 1
  1. 1.Behavioral and Molecular Ecology Group, Department of Biological SciencesUniversity of Wisconsin-MilwaukeeMilwaukeeUSA
  2. 2.Escuela de BiologíaUniversidad de Costa RicaSan JoséCosta Rica

Personalised recommendations