Advertisement

Journal of Insect Conservation

, Volume 16, Issue 4, pp 581–589 | Cite as

Patch shape alters spider community structure: links between microhabitat choice and sensitivity to increased edge habitat

  • Stephanie M. Cobbold
  • Sarah R. Supp
ORIGINAL PAPER

Abstract

Increased edge effects in fragmented habitats can affect the abundance of edge-dwelling organisms, but these impacts may depend on the biological attributes of species. Microhabitat choice, a species characteristic that reflects combinations of biological traits, may affect the ability of peripheral species to take advantage of increased edge habitat in the presence of edge effects. In this field study, we built artificial shrub modules designed to encourage web spiders to build webs on the periphery. While modules were identical in volume, they differed in shape (cubic and elongated), so that elongated modules had more edge habitat and were subject to enhanced edge effects. Given that the tangle-web spiders Theridion and Dictyna built webs on module edges and strongly differed in terms of concealment and substrate generalization, two habitat characteristics associated with lower vulnerability to habitat modification, we tested the hypothesis that Theridion, which built webs in more concealed locations and on a greater diversity of substrate configurations in the modules compared to Dictyna, would take better advantage of increased edge habitat. As predicted, Theridion was significantly more abundant on elongated modules whereas the abundance of Dictyna did not respond to shape, even though the change in module shape entailed a similar increase in favored substrate for both spider groups. Our results suggest that the microhabitat associations of organisms may be linked to their propensity to be sensitive to edges, and that a better understanding of these links can improve our ability to predict the effects of habitat modification on biodiversity.

Keywords

Biological traits Concealment Edge effects Fragmentation Generalist Patch geometry 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This research was supported by a grant from the Utah State University Ecology Center, which also kindly gave us permission to do field work at the Green Canyon Field Station. We thank L. Spears and B. Kuethe for help with module construction, and J.A. MacMahon, S. Durham, S. K. M. Ernest, E. White, T. Evans, J. Bissonnette and E.W. Schupp for helpful comments on the manuscript. We are also grateful to R. P. O’Donnell, P. R. Cobbold and G. M. Yenni.

References

  1. Anderson L, Burgin S (2008) Patterns of bird predation on reptiles in small woodland remnant edges in peri-urban north-western Sydney, Australia. Landsc Ecol 23:1039–1047. doi: 10.1007/s10980-008-9252-5 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Andren H, Angelstam P (1988) Elevated predation rates as an edge effect in habitat islands: experimental evidence. Ecology 69:544–547CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Atlegrim O (1989) Exclusion of birds from bilberry stands: impact on insect larval density and damage to the bilberry. Oecologia 79:136–139. doi: 10.1007/BF00378251 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Benjamin SP, Zschokke S (2002) Untangling the tangle-web: web construction behavior of the comb-footed spider Steatoda triangulosa and comments on phylogenetic implications (Araneae: Theridiidae). J Insect Behav 15:791–801. doi: 10.1023/A:1021175507377 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Blackledge TA, Coddington JA, Gillespie RG (2003) Are three-dimensional spider webs defensive adaptations? Ecol Lett 6:13–18. doi: 10.1046/j.1461-0248.2003.00384.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Brand LA (2004) Prediction and assessment of edge response and abundance for desert riparian birds in southeastern Arizona. PhD thesis. Colorado State University, Fort Collins, USAGoogle Scholar
  7. Buchholz S (2010) Ground spider assemblages as indicators for habitat structure in inland sand ecosystems. Biodivers Conserv 19:2565–2595CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Burkey TV (1993) Edge effects in seed and egg predation at two neotropical rainforest sites. Biol Conserv 66:139–143. doi: 10.1016/0006-3207(93)90145-Q CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Caley MJ, St John J (1996) Refuge availability structures assemblages of coral reef fishes. J Anim Ecol 65:414–428CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Chamberlin RV, Gertsch WJ (1958) The spider family Dictynidae in America north of Mexico. B Am Mus Nat Hist 116:1–152Google Scholar
  11. Chew RM (1961) Ecology of the spiders of a desert community. J NY Entomol Soc 69:5–41Google Scholar
  12. Cloudsley-Thompson JL (1962) Microclimates and the distribution of terrestrial arthropods. Annu Rev Entomol 7:199–222CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Cutler B, Jennings DT, Moody MJ (1977) Biology and habitats of the lynx spider Oxyopes scalaris Hentz (Araneae: Oxyopidae). Entomol News 88:87–97Google Scholar
  14. Davies KF, Margules CR, Lawrence JF (2004) A synergistic effect puts rare, specialized species at greater risk of extinction. Ecology 85:265–271CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Eggleston DB, Lipcius RN, Grover JJ (1997) Predator and shelter-size effects on coral reef fish and spiny lobster prey. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 149:43–59CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Ehmann WJ (1994a) The organization of shrub-steppe spider assemblages: a hierarchical evaluation of deterministic and stochastic influences. PhD dissertation, Department of Biology, Utah State University, Logan, Utah, USAGoogle Scholar
  17. Ehmann WJ (1994b) Spider habitat selection: an experimental field test of the role of substrate diameter. J Arachnol 22:77–81Google Scholar
  18. Ehmann WJ (1994c) Organization of spider assemblages on shrubs: an assessment of the role of dispersal mode in colonization. Am Midl Nat 131:301–310CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Ehmann WJ, MacMahon JA (1996) Initial tests for priority effects among spiders that co-occur on sagebrush shrubs. J Arachnol 24:173–185Google Scholar
  20. Ewers RM, Didham RK (2006) Confounding factors in the detection of species responses to habitat fragmentation. Biol Rev 81:117–142PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Ewers RM, Didham RK (2007) The effect of fragment shape and species’ sensitivity to habitat edges on animal population size. Conserv Biol 21:926–936PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Fagan WF, Cantrell RS, Cosner C (1999) How habitat edges change species interactions. Am Nat 153:165–182CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Ferguson SH (2000) Predator size and distance to edge: is bigger better? Can J Zool 78:713–720. doi: 10.1139/cjz-78-5-713 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Foelix RF (1996) Biology of spiders, 2nd edn. Oxford University Press, NYGoogle Scholar
  25. Gilpin ME, Diamond JM (1976) Calculation of immigration and extinction curves from the species-area-distance relation. PNAS 73:4130–4134PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Hackett HM, Pagels JF (2003) Nest site characteristics of the endangered northern flying squirrel (Glaucomys sabrinus coloratus) in Southwest Virginia. Am Midl Nat 150:321–331CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Hatley CL, MacMahon JA (1980) Spider community organization: seasonal variation and the role of vegetation architecture. Environ Entomol 9:632–639Google Scholar
  28. Heikkinen MW, MacMahon JA (2004) Assemblages of spiders on models of semi-arid shrubs. J Arachnol 32:313–323CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Henle K, Davies KF, Kleyer M, Margules CR, Settele J (2004) Predictors of species sensitivity to fragmentation. Biodivers Conserv 13:207–251CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Herrmann JD, Bailey D, Hofer G, Herzog F, Schmidt-Entling MH (2010) Spiders associated with the meadow and tree canopies of orchards respond differently to habitat fragmentation. Landsc Ecol 25:1375–1384CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Holbrook SJ, Schmitt RJ (2002) Competition for shelter space causes density-dependent predation mortality in damselfishes. Ecology 83:2855–2868. doi: 10.1890/0012-9658(2002)083[2855:CFSSCD]2.0.CO;2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Jackson RR (1977) Comparative studies of Dictyna and Mallos (Araneae, Dictynidae): III. Prey and predatory behavior. Psyche 84:267–280CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Jackson RR, Pollard SD (1996) Predatory behavior of jumping spiders. Annu Rev Entomol 41:287–308. doi: 10.1146/annurev.en.41.010196.001443 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Jenks-Jay N (1982) Chick shelters decrease avian predation in least tern colonies on Nantucket Island, Massachusetts. J Field Ornithol 53:58–60Google Scholar
  35. Johnston DW, Odum EP (1956) Breeding bird populations in relation to plant succession on the piedmont of Georgia. Ecology 37:50–62. doi: 10.2307/1929668 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Levi HW (1957) The spider genera Enoplognatha, Theridion, and Paidisca in America north of Mexico (Araneae, Theridiidae). B Am Mus Nat Hist 122:1–123Google Scholar
  37. Lomolino MV (1990) The target area hypothesis: the influence of island area on immigration rates of non-volant mammals. Oikos 57:297–300CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Manicom C, Schwarzkopf L, Alford RA, Schoener TW (2008) Self-made shelters protect spiders from predation. PNAS 105:14903–14907. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0807107105 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Marc P, Canard A (1997) Maintaining spider biodiversity in agrosystems as a tool in pest control. Agric Ecosyst Environ 62:229–235. doi: 10.1016/S0167-8809(96)01133-4 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Moksnes P-O, Pihl L, van Montfrans J (1998) Predation on postlarvae and juveniles of the shore crab Carcinus maenas: importance of shelter, size and cannibalism. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 166:211–225CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Murcia C (1995) Edge effects in fragmented forests: implications for conservation. Trends Ecol Evol 10:58–62. doi: 10.1016/S0169-5347(00)88977-6 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Nyffeler M (1988) Prey records of the web-building spiders Dictyna segregata (Dictynidae), Theridion australe (Theridiidae), Tidarren haemorrhoidale (Theridiidae), and Frontinella pyramitela (Linyphiidae) in a cotton agroecosystem. Southwest Nat 33:215–218CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Nyffeler M (1999) Prey selection of spiders in the field. J Arachnol 27:317–324Google Scholar
  44. Oksanen J, Blanchet FG, Kindt R, Legendre P, O’Hara RG, Simpson GL, Solymos P, Stevens MH, Wagner H (2010) Vegan: Community ecology package. R package version 1.17-1. http://CRAN.Rproject.org/package = vegan
  45. Ostman O, Mellbrand K, Hamback PA (2009) Edge or dispersal effects-their relative importance on arthropod densities on small islands. Basic Appl Ecol 10:475–484. doi: 10.1016/j.baae.2008.09.002 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Pearce JL, Venier LA (2006) The use of ground beetles (Coleoptera: Carabidae) and spiders (Araneae) as bioindicators of sustainable forest management: a review. Ecol Indic 6:780–793CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Pearson DE (2009) Invasive plant architecture alters trophic interactions by changing predator abundance and behavior. Oecologia 159:549–558. doi: 10.1007/s00442-008-1241-5 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Pekar S (2000) Webs, diet and fecundity of Theridion impressum (Araneae:Theridiidae). Eur J Entomol 97:47–50Google Scholar
  49. Prenter J, Pérez-Staples D, Taylor PW (2010) The effects of morphology and substrate diameter on climbing and locomotor performance in male spiders. Funct Ecol 24:400–408Google Scholar
  50. Purger JJ, Mészáros LA, Purger D (2004) Predation on artificial nests in post-mining recultivated area and forest edge: contrasting the use of plasticine and quail eggs. Ecol Eng 22:209–212Google Scholar
  51. Rand TA, Tylianakis JM, Tscharntke T (2006) Spillover edge effects: the dispersal of agriculturally subsidized insect natural enemies into adjacent natural habitats. Ecol Lett 9:603–614. doi: 10.1111/j.1461-0248.2006.00911.x PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Ries L, Sisk TD (2010) What is an edge species? The implications of sensitivity to habitat edges. Oikos. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0706.2010.18414.x
  53. Roberts JA, Taylor PW, Uetz GW (2007) Consequences of complex signaling: predator detection of multimodal cues. Behav Ecol 236-240. doi: 10.1093/beheco/arl079
  54. Robinson JV (1981) The effect of architectural variation in habitat on a spider community: an experimental field study. Ecology 62:73–80. doi: 10.2307/1936670 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. R Development Core Team (2009) R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. ISBN 3-900051-07-0, URL http://www.R-project.org
  56. Ross LK (2008) Predation on Platycryptus undatus (DeGeer 1778) by Parasteatoda tepidariorum (C.L. Koch 1841) (Araneae: Salticidae Theridiidae). Peckhamia 72.1:1Google Scholar
  57. Schmidt MH, Thies C, Nentwig W, Tscharntke T (2008) Contrasting responses of arable spiders to the landscape matrix at different spatial scales. J Biogeogr 35:157–166Google Scholar
  58. Sisk TD, Battin J (2002) Habitat edges and avian ecology: geographic patterns and insights for western landscapes. Stud Avian Biol 25:30–48Google Scholar
  59. Stiles GJ, Coyle FA (2001) Habitat distribution and life history of species in the spider genera Theridion, Rugathodes, and Wamba in the Great Smoky Mountains National Park (Araneae, Theridiidae). J Arachnol 29:396–412. doi: 10.1636/0161-8202(2001)029[0396:HDALHO]2.0.CO;2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Summerville KS (2004) Do smaller forest fragments contain a greater abundance of Lepidoptera crop and forage consumers? Environ Entomol 33:234–241CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Ubick D, Paquin P, Cushing PE, Roth V (2005) Spiders of North America: an identification manual. American Arachnological Society, Keene (New Hampshire)Google Scholar
  62. Webb JK, Shine R (1997) A field study of spatial ecology and movements of a threatened snake species, Hoplocephalus bungaroides. Biol Conserv 82:203–217. doi: 10.1016/S0006-3207(97)00032-3 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Wiens JA, Crawford CS, Gosz JR (1985) Boundary dynamics: a conceptual framework for studying landscape ecosystems. Oikos 45:421–427CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Wing K (1984) The effects of altered prey availability and shrub architecture on spider community parameters: a field experiment in a shrub-steppe ecosystem. PhD dissertation, Utah State University, Logan, Utah, USAGoogle Scholar
  65. Wise DH (1993) Spiders in ecological webs. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Wise DH (2006) Cannibalism, food limitation, intraspecific competition, and the regulation of spider populations. Annu Rev Entomol 51:441–465. doi: 10.1146/annurev.ento.51.110104.150947 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Wolda H (1981) Similarity indices, sample size and diversity. Oecologia 50:296–302. doi: 10.1007/BF00344966 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Biology and the Ecology CenterUtah State UniversityLoganUSA

Personalised recommendations