, Volume 57, Issue 1–2, pp 25–31 | Cite as

Mechanisms of prey selection by predaceous stoneflies: roles of prey morphology, behavior and predator hunger

  • Manuel C. MollesJr.
  • Robert D. Pietruszka
Original Papers


Laboratory feeding experiments using Hesperoperla pacifica (Banks), Perlidae, and Megarcys signata (Hagen), Perlodidae, as predators and Baetis tricaudatus Dodds and Ephemerella altana Allen as prey indicate a strong effect of prey morphology and mobility and predator hunger on prey selection by stoneflies. Knowledge of both dietary composition and feeding behavior was necessary to fully understand prey selection by these stoneflies.

Fasted stoneflies presented with live prey ate more E. altana while satiated stoneflies ate approximately equal numbers of the two mayfly species. This pattern of dietary composition was the result of a reduction of attack frequency on the slower swimming E. altana with predator satiation and a continued high attack rate on B. tricaudatus regardless of recent feeding history. In contrast, fasted H. pacifica fed fresh frozen mayflies ate more B. tricaudatus indicating the importance of differences in prey mobility in controlling dietary composition.

The high degree of similarity in patterns of feeding and mechanisms underlying those patterns for H. pacifica and M. signata suggest that they may be using similar “rules” for choosing mayfly prey and we suggest that mayfly prey are ranked by stoneflies on the basis of handling times. A general mechanistic model for stoneflies feeding on mayflies is presented and discussed.


Dietary Composition Attack Rate Feeding Experiment Attack Frequency Prey Selection 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Allan JD (1982) Feeding habits and prey consumption of three setipalpian stoneflies (Plecoptera) in a mountain stream. Ecology 63:26–34Google Scholar
  2. Baumann RW, Gaufin AR, Surdick RF (1977) The stoneflies (Plecoptera) of the Rocky Mountains. Mem Amer Ent Soc 31Google Scholar
  3. Brink P (1979) Studies on swedish stoneflies (Plecoptera). Opusc Ent Suppl 11:1–246Google Scholar
  4. Cather MR, Gaufin AR (1975) Life history and ecology of Megarcys signata (Plecoptera: Perlodidae), Mill Creek, Wasatch Mountains, Utah. Great Basin Nat 35:39–48Google Scholar
  5. Charnov EL (1976) Optimal foraging: attack strategy of a mantid. Am Nat 110:141–151Google Scholar
  6. Cock MJW (1978) The assessment of preference. J Anim Ecol 47:805–816Google Scholar
  7. Conover WJ (1980) Practical nonparametric statistics. John Wiley and Sons, NYGoogle Scholar
  8. Dodds GS, Hisaw FL (1924) Ecological studies of aquatic insects. I. adaptations of mayfly nymphs to swift streams. Ecology 5:137–150Google Scholar
  9. Edmunds GR Jr (1972) Biogeography and evolution of Ephemeroptera. Ann Rev Ent 17:21–42Google Scholar
  10. Edmunds GF, Jensen SL, Berner L (1976) The mayflies of North and Central America. Univ Minn Press, MinneapolisGoogle Scholar
  11. Fuller RL, Steward KW (1977) The food habits of stoneflies (Plecoptera) in the upper Gunnison River, Colorado. Envir Ent 6:293–302Google Scholar
  12. Hassell MP, Southwood TRE (1978) Foraging strategies of insects. Ann Rev Ecol Syst 9:75–98Google Scholar
  13. Hynes HBN (1971) The taxonomy and ecology of the nymphs of the British Plecoptera with notes on the adults and eggs. Trans Roy Ent Soc Lond 91:459–557Google Scholar
  14. Ivlev VS (1961) Experimental ecology of the feeding of fishes. Yale Univ Press, New HavenGoogle Scholar
  15. Johnson JH (1981) Food habits and dietary overlap of perlid stone-flies (Plecoptera) in a tributary of Lake Ontario. Can J Zool 59:2030–2037Google Scholar
  16. Krebs JR (1978) Optimal foraging: decision rules for predators. In: JR Krebs, NB Davies (eds), Behavioral ecology an evolutionary approach, Blackwell Scientific Publications, Oxford-Melbourne, pp 23–63Google Scholar
  17. Krebs JR, Cowie RJ (1976) Foraging strategies in birds. Ardea 64:98–115Google Scholar
  18. Lechowicz MJ (1982) The sampling characteristics of electivity indices. Oecologia (Berl) 52:22–30Google Scholar
  19. MacArthur RH (1972) Geographical ecology. Harper and Row, NY-LondonGoogle Scholar
  20. Mackereth JC (1957) Notes on the Plecoptera from a stony stream. J Anim Ecol 26:343–351Google Scholar
  21. Malmqvist B, Sjöström P (1980) Prey size and feeding patterns in Dinocras cephalotes (Plecoptera). Oikos 35:311–316Google Scholar
  22. McCafferty WP (1981) Aquatic entomology. Science Books International, BostonGoogle Scholar
  23. Minshall GW, Minshall JN (1966) Notes on the life history and ecology of Isoperla clio (Newman) and Isogenus decisus Walker (Plecoptera: Perlodidae) Am Midl Nat 76:340–350Google Scholar
  24. Muttkowski RA, Smith GW (1929) The food of trout stream insects in Yellowstone National Park. Roosevelt Wildlife Ann 2:241–263Google Scholar
  25. Pastorok RA (1980) The effects of predator hunger and food abundance on prey selection by Chaoborus larvae. Limnol Oceanogr 25:910–921Google Scholar
  26. Peckarsky BL (1980) Behavioral interactions between stoneflies and mayflies: behavioral observations. Ecology 61:932–943Google Scholar
  27. Peckarsky BL (1980) Aquatic insect predator-prey relations. Bio Science 32:261–266Google Scholar
  28. Peckarsky BL, Dodson SI (1980a) Do stonefly predators influence benthic distributions in streams? Ecology 61:1275–1282Google Scholar
  29. Peckarsky BL, Dodson SI (1980b) An experimental analysis of biological factors contributing to stream community structure. Ecology 61:1283–1290Google Scholar
  30. Pyke GH, Pulliam HR, Charnov HL (1977) Optimal foraging: a selective review of theory and tests. Quar Rev Biol 52:137–154Google Scholar
  31. Schoener TW (1971) Theory of feeding strategies. Ann Rev Ecol Syst 2:369–404Google Scholar
  32. Sheldon AL (1979) Size relationships of Acroneuria californica and its prey. Hydrobiol 34:85–94Google Scholar
  33. Sheldon AL (1980) Resource division by perlid stoneflies (Plecoptera) in a lake outlet ecosystem. Hydrobiol 71:155–161Google Scholar
  34. Siegel S (1956) Nonparametric statistics for the behavioral sciences. McGraw Hill, NYGoogle Scholar
  35. Siegfried CA, Knight AW (1976) Prey selection by a setipalpian stonefly nymph, Acroneuria (Calineuria) californica Banks (Plecoptera: Perlidae). Ecology 57:603–608Google Scholar
  36. Snellen RK, Stewart KW (1979) The life cycle of Perlesta placida (Plecoptera: Perlidae) in an intermittent stream in Northern Texas. Ann Ent Soc Am 72:659–666Google Scholar
  37. Tarter DC, Krumholz LA (1971) Life history and ecology of Paragnetina media (Walker) (Insecta: Plecoptera) in Doe Run, Meade County, Kentucky. Am Midl Nat 86:169–180Google Scholar
  38. Vaught GL, Stewart KW (1974) The life history and ecology of the stonefly Neoperla clymene (Newman) (Plecoptera: Perlidae). Ann Ent Soc Am 67:167–178Google Scholar
  39. Werner EE, Mittleback GG (1981) Optimal foraging: field tests of diet choice and habitat switching. Amer Zool 21:813–829Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1983

Authors and Affiliations

  • Manuel C. MollesJr.
    • 1
  • Robert D. Pietruszka
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of BiologyThe University of New MexicoAlbuquerqueUSA

Personalised recommendations