Summary
In a number of studies which provide food extraction curves for sucking predators, data were obtained by separating the predator from the prey (i.e. by artificially interrupting feeding) at predetermined intervals within the total feeding time. The amount of food the predator had extracted at these time intervals was then determined by measuring either the mass gain in the predator or the mass loss in the prey. An implicit assumption of this method is that at the time feeding is interrupted, the food extracted by the predator is contained within its own digestive system and no part of the food has been released back into the prey. I found this was not the case with the crab spider Diaea sp. indet. feeding on the fruit fly Drosophila immigrans. The food Diaea extracts from prey is retained in its own digestive system only at times when the spider changes feeding sites on the prey and when it discards the prey when finished feeding. At other times it cycles the extracted food between itself and the prey (i.e. a sucking phase is alternated with a relaxing phase during which the extracted food is released back into the prey). Unless feeding is interrupted as close as possible to the end of the sucking phase, the mass change measured in the spider will be an underestimate of the actual amount of food extracted at this time. My results suggest that understanding how a sucking predator's feeding mechanism affects the transfer of food is necessary, not only in identifying constraints affecting feeding efficiency, but also in identifying how these constraints relate to the design of empirical tests. The precision of these tests will, in part, reflect the degree to which these mechanisms are incorporated into the test design.
References
Bailey PCE (1986a) The feeding behaviour of a sit-and-wait predator, Ranatra dispar (Heteroptera: Nepidae): optimal foraging and feeding dynamics. Oecologia 68:291–297
Bailey PCE (1986b) The movement of water into submerged prey during feeding by the aquatic bug Ranatra dispar (Heteroptera: Nepidae), the water stick insect. Hydrobiologica 134:97–101
Barlow CA, Whittingham JA (1986) Feeding economy of larvae of a flower fly Metasyrphus corollae (Dip.: Syrphidae): partial consumption of prey. Entomophaga 31:49–57
Charnov EL (1976) Optimal foraging, the marginal value theorem. Theor Pop Biol 9:129–136
Cheverton J, Kacelnik A, Krebs JR (1985) Optimal foraging: constraints and currencies. In: Holldobler B, Lindauer M (eds) Experimental behavioral ecology. Fisher Verlag, Stuttgart, pp 109–126
Cook RM, Cockrell BJ (1978) Predator ingestion rate and its bearing on feeding and the theory of optimal diets. J Anim Ecol 47:529–547
Giller PS (1980) The control of handling-time and its effects on the foraging strategy of a heteropteran predator, Notonecta. J Anim Ecol 49:699–712
Kruse SD (1983) Optimal foraging by predaceous diving beetle larvae on toad tadpoles. Oecologia 58:383–388
Pollard SD (1988) Partial consumption of prey: the significance of prey water loss on estimates of biomass intake. Oecologica 76:475–476
Pollard SD (1989) Constraints affecting partial prey consumption by a crab spider, Diaea sp. indet. (Araneae: Thomisidae). Oecologica 81:392–396
Pollard SD (1990) The feeding strategy of a crab spider, Diaea sp. Indet. (Araneae: Thomisidae): post-capture decision rules. J Zool (London) (in press)
Sih A (1980) Optimal foraging: partial consumption of prey. Am Nat 116:281–290
Stephens DW, Krebs JR (1986) Foraging theory. Princeton University Press, Princeton
Ward P, Enders MM (1985) Conflict and cooperation in the group feeding of the social spider Stegodyphus mimosarum. Behaviour 94:167–182
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Pollard, S.D. A methodological constraint influencing measurement of food intake rates in sucking predators. Oecologia 82, 569–571 (1990). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00319803
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00319803