Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Habitat patch size and isolation as predictors of occupancy and number of argyrodine spider kleptoparasites in Nephila webs

  • Short Communication
  • Published:
Naturwissenschaften Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

How fully a suitable habitat patch is utilized by organisms depends crucially on patch size and isolation. Testing this interplay is made difficult in many systems by the arbitrariness of defining a “habitat patch”, measuring its boarders, and relatively low detection probability of the inhabitants. Spider webs as habitat patches for obligate web kleptoparasites are free from these problems. Each individual web is a highly discrete and readily measured habitat patch, and the detection probability of argyrodine spider kleptoparasites is very nearly 1. Hence, spider webs emerge as simple systems for ecological models such as patch occupancy and metapopulation biology. Recently, I showed that the distribution of kleptoparasites among host webs relates both to web (patch) size as well as patch connectivity. Here, I test the relative importance of patch size versus isolation in explaining patch occupancy and abundance of inhabitants. I find that (1) web size is the better predictor of patch occupancy and abundance. (2) Web size is overall positively correlated with abundance, but predicts it most precisely among interconnected webs and not at all among the most isolated webs. Hence, patch occupancy and inhabitant abundance is explained by a rather complex interplay between patch size and isolation.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

References

  • Agnarsson I (2003) Spider webs as habitat patches—the distribution of kleptoparasites (Argyrodes, Theridiidae) among host webs (Nephila, Tetragnathidae). J Arachnol 31:344–349

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Andrén H (1996) Population responses to habitat fragmentation: statistical power and the random sample hypothesis. Oikos 76:235–242

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cangialosi K (1990) Life cycle and behavior of the kleptoparasitic spider, Argyrodes ululans (Araneae, Theridiidae). J Arachnol 18:347–358

    Google Scholar 

  • Cangialosi KR (1997) Foraging versatility and the influence of host availability in Argyrodes trigonum (Araneae, Theridiidae). J Arachnol 25:182–193

    Google Scholar 

  • Drakare S, Lennon JJ, Hillebrand H (2006) The imprint of the geographical, evolutionary and ecological context on species–area relationships. Ecol Lett 9:215–227

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Elgar MA (1989) Kleptoparasitism: a cost of aggregating for an orb-weaving spider. Anim Behav 37:1052–1055

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elgar MA (1993) Inter-specific associations involving spiders: kleptoparasitism, mimicry and mutualism. Mem Queensland Mus 33:411–430

    Google Scholar 

  • Grostal P, Walter DE (1997) Kleptoparasites or commensals? Effects of Argyrodes antipodianus (Araneae: Theridiidae) on Nephila plumipes (Araneae: Tetragnathidae). Oecologia 111:570–574

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grostal P, Walter DE (1999) Host specificity and distribution of the kleptobiotic spider Argyrodes antipodianus (Araneae, Theridiidae) on orbwebs in Queensland. J Arachnol 27:522–530

    Google Scholar 

  • Hanski I (1999) Metapopulation ecology. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Hanski I, Simberloff D (1997) The metapopulation approach, its history, conceptual domain, and application to conservation. In: Hanski I, Gilpin ME (eds) Metapopulation Biology. Academic, San Diego, CA, pp 5–26

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Kery M, Schmid H (2004) Monitoring programs need to take into account imperfect species detectability. Basic Appl Ecol 5:65–73

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krebs CJ (1994) Ecology: the experimental analysis of distribution and abundance, 4th edn. Addison-Wesley Publishing Co, Oxford, 801 pp

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuntner M, Coddington JA, Hormiga G (2008a) Phylogeny of extant nephilid orb-weaving spiders (Araneae, Nephilidae): testing morphological and ethological homologies. Cladistics 24:47–217

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kuntner M, Haddad CR, Aljančič G, Blejec A (2008b) Ecology and web allometry of Clitaetra irenae, an arboricolous African orb-weaving spider (Araneae, Araneoidea, Nephilidae). J Arachnol 36:583–594

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MacArthur RH, Wilson EO (1967) The theory of island biogeography. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ

  • Moilanen A (2002) Implications of empirical data quality to metapopulation model parameter estimation and application. Oikos 96:516–30

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nicol SC, Possingham HP (2010) Should metapopulation restoration strategies increase patch area or number of patches? Ecol Appl 20:566–581

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Pellet J, Fleishman E, Dobkin DS, Ganderd A, Murphye DD (2007) An empirical evaluation of the area and isolation paradigm of metapopulation dynamics. Biol Cons 136:483–495

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Prugh R, Hodges KE, Sinclair ARE, Brashares JS (2008) Effect of habitat area and isolation on fragmented animal populations. PNAS 105:20770–20775

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Robinson MH, Robinson B (1973) Ecology and behavior of the giant wood spider Nephila maculata (Fabr.) in New Guinea. Smithson Contrib Zool 149:1–73

    Google Scholar 

  • Rypstra AL, Binford GJ (1995) Philoponella republicana (Araneae, Uloboridae) as a commensal in the webs of other spiders. J Arachnol 23:1–8

    Google Scholar 

  • Sahlin E, Schroeder LM (2010) Importance of habitat patch size for occupancy and density of aspen-associated saproxylic beetles. Biodivers Conserv 19:1325–1339

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith Trail D (1980) Predation by Argyrodes (Theridiidae) on solitary and communal spiders. Psyche 87:349–355

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Turlure C, Choutt J, Van Dyck H, Baguette M, Schtickzelle N (2010) Functional habitat area as a reliable proxy for population size: case study using two butterfly species of conservation concern. J Insect Conserv 14:379–388

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vollrath F (1987) Kleptobiosis in spiders. In: Nentwig W (ed) Ecophysiology of spiders. Springer-Verlag, New York, NY, pp 274–286

    Google Scholar 

  • Watling JI, Donelly MA (2006) Fragments as islands: a synthesis of faunal responses to habitat patchiness. Conserv Biol 20:1016–1025

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wintle BA, McCarthy MA, Parris KM, Burgman MA (2004) Precision and bias of methods for estimating point survey detection probabilities. Ecol Appl 14:703–712

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

Thanks go to Laura J. May-Collado for help with logistics and fieldwork, and Gabriel Jacomé and Plinio Gondola at the STRI Bocas del Toro field station for their hospitality and help with permits and various logistics. This study was funded through the UMEB program funded by NSF grant (DBI-0602642) to A. Ramirez. Matjaž Kuntner, Jonathan Coddington, and two anonymous reviewers provided very useful comments which improved this manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Biology, University of Puerto Rico-Rio Piedras (UPRRP), San Juan, Puerto Rico, PR, 00931-3360, USA

    Ingi Agnarsson

  2. Department of Entomology, National Museum of Natural History, Smithsonian Institution, NHB-105, PO Box 37012, Washington, DC, 20013-7012, USA

    Ingi Agnarsson

Authors
  1. Ingi Agnarsson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ingi Agnarsson.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Agnarsson, I. Habitat patch size and isolation as predictors of occupancy and number of argyrodine spider kleptoparasites in Nephila webs. Naturwissenschaften 98, 163–167 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00114-010-0750-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00114-010-0750-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation