Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Bad neighbors: hunger and dominance drive spacing and position in an orb-weaving spider colony

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The costs and benefits of group living can vary among group members depending on their physical location within the group. If individuals can anticipate poor positions and leave the group, the society may dissolve. Therefore, understanding the geometry of social groups is critical to understanding their stability. We examined social geometry in the colonial spider, Cyrtophora citricola (Araneidae), which builds long-lasting individual webs within a shared colony framework. Group foraging benefits are thought to be an ultimate cause for the evolution of colonial living in spiders, but conflict often arises over food and territory. To understand how foraging benefits of grouping interact with inter-individual conflict to shape group geometry, we examined the effects of feeding history and body size on inter-individual spacing in the laboratory. We also examined the effect of spider density and body size on individual position within colonies in a semi-natural setting. We found that spiders with prior food stress increased their inter-individual spacing, suggesting that competition for prey may override group foraging benefits. Larger spiders built their webs first, relegating smaller spiders to the margins of the space and sometimes preventing them from completing web construction. In a semi-natural setting, spiders did not maintain close spacing, but rather spread themselves out over the substrate, and larger spiders occupied the preferred side of the substrate to the exclusion of smaller spiders. Contrary to the hypothesis that foraging advantages to group living promote greater cohesion under food stress, food competition appeared to promote group instability, and exclusion of small spiders by larger and more dominant individuals seemed to determine position in the colony.

Significance statement

In colonial spiders, foraging benefits are thought to be the primary driver of group living, yet there is often conflict over food and territory within the group. We tested the hypothesis that foraging benefits should promote group cohesion under food stress in the colonial spider Cyrtophora citricola. By manipulating prey abundance prior to trials, but minimizing prey cues during trials, we eliminated the influence of prey position on spiders, leaving interactions among individuals to determine spider location. Prior food deprivation caused spiders to space themselves farther apart, refuting the group cohesion hypothesis. Larger spiders prevented smaller spiders from constructing webs and relegated them to less preferred positions in the group, suggesting that aggressive interactions determined spacing and placement within the colony, but that these interactions are modulated by feeding history.

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

Access this article

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Andersen P, Gill R (1982) Cox’s regression model for counting processes, a large sample study. Ann Stat 10:1100–1200

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arnott G, Elwood RW (2009) Assessment of fighting ability in animal contests. Anim Behav 77:991–1004

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bailely AM, Rendon NM, O’Malley KJ, Demas GE (2016) Food as a supplementary cue triggers seasonal changes in aggression, but not reproduction, in Siberian hamsters. Physiol Behav 167:298–308

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barta Z, Flynn R, Giraldeau L (1997) Geometry for a selfish foraging group: a genetic algorithm approach. Proc R Soc B 264:1233–1238

    Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Barton RA (1993) Sociospatial mechanisms of feeding competition in female olive baboons, Papio anubis. Anim Behav 46:791–802

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bilde T, Lubin Y (2011) Group living in spiders: cooperative breeding and coloniality. In: Heberstein M (ed) Spider behaviour flexibility and versatility. Cambridge University Press, New York, pp 275–306

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Bitetti MS, Janson CH (2001) Social foraging and the finder’s share in the capuchin monkeys, Cebus apella. Anim Behav 62:47–56

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buskirk RE (1975) Coloniality, activity patterns and feeding in a tropical orb-weaving spider. Ecology 56:1314–1328

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cangialosi KR, Uetz GW (1987) Spacing in colonial spiders: effects of environment and experience. Ethology 76:236–246

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Caraco T, Uetz GW, Gillespie RG, Giraldeau L-A (1995) Resource consumption variance within and among individuals: on coloniality in spiders. Ecology 76:196–205

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Drummond H, Chavelas CG (1989) Food shortage influences of sibling aggression in the blue-footed booby. Anim Behav 37:806–819

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ellsworth EA, Belthoff JR (1999) Effects of social status on the dispersal behavior of juvenile western screech-owls. Anim Behav 57:883–892

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Emlen ST (1982) The evolution of helping. I. An ecological constraints model. Am Nat 119:29–39

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fernández Campón F (2007) Group foraging in the colonial spider Parawixia bistriata (Araneidae): effect of resource levels and prey size. Anim Behav 74:1551–1562

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gilbert C, Robertson G, Le Maho Y, Naito Y, Ancel A (2006) Huddling behavior in emperor penguins: dynamics of huddling. Physiol Behav 88:479–488

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hamilton WD (1971) Geometry of the selfish herd. J Theor Biol 31:295–311

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hatchwell BJ, Komdeur J (2000) Ecological constraints, life history traits and the evolution of cooperative breeding. Anim Behav 59:1079–1086

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Heesen M, Macdonald S, Ostner J, Schülke O (2015) Ecological and social determinants of group cohesiveness and within-group spatial position in wild Assamese macaques. Ethology 121:270–283

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hemelrijk CK (2000) Towards the integration of social dominance and spatial structure. Anim Behav 59:1035–1048

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hirsch BT (2007) Costs and benefits of within-group spatial position: a feeding competition model. Q Rev Biol 82:9–27

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hodge MA, Uetz GW (1992) Anti-predator benefits of single and mixed-species grouping by Nephila clavipes (L.) (Araneae, Tetragnathidae). J Arachnol 20:212–216

    Google Scholar 

  • Hodge MA, Uetz GW (1995) A comparison of agonistic behavior of colonial web-building spiders from desert and tropical habitats. Anim Behav 50:963–972

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jakob EM, Marshall SD, Uetz GW (1996) Estimating fitness: a comparison of body condition indices. Oikos 77:61–67

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johannesen J, Wennmann JT, Lubin Y (2012) Dispersal behavior and colony structure in a colonial spider. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 66:1387–1398

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnstone RA (2000) Models of reproductive skew: a review and synthesis. Ethology 106:5–26

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kim KW (2000) Dispersal behavior in a subsocial spider: group conflict and the effect of food availability. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 48:182–187

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krause J, Ruxton GD (2002) Living in groups. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Leborgne R, Cantarella T, Pasquet A (1998) Colonial life versus solitary life in Cyrtophora citricola (Araneae, Araneidae). Insect Soc 45:125–134

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lubin YD (1974) Adaptive advantages and the evolution of colony formation in Cyrtophora (Araneae: Araneidae). Zool J Linn Soc-Lond 54:321–339

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McGowan A, Sharp SP, Simeon M, Hatchwell BJ (2006) Competing for position in the communal roosts of long-tailed tits. Anim Behav 72:1035–1043

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mestre L, Lubin Y (2011) Settling where the food is: prey abundance promotes colony formation and increases group size in a web-building spider. Anim Behav 81(4):741–748

  • Morrell LJ, Romey WL (2008) Optimal individual positions within animal groups. Behav Ecol 19:909–919

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morrell LJ, Ruxton GD, James R (2010) Spatial positioning in the selfish herd. Behav Ecol 22:16–22

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pasinelli G, Walters JR (2002) Social and environmental factors affect natal dispersal and philopatry of male red-cockaded woodpeckers. Ecology 83:2229–2239

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rao Jammalamadaka S, Sengupta, A (2001) Topics in circular statistics. World Scientific Press, Singapore

  • Rayor LS, Uetz GW (1990) Trade-offs in foraging success and predation risk with spatial position in colonial spiders. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 27:77–86

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rayor LS, Uetz GW (1993) Ontogenetic shifts within the selfish herd: predation risk and foraging trade-offs change with age in colonial web-building spiders. Oecologia 95:1–8

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Rypstra AL (1979) Foraging flocks of spiders: a study of aggregate behavior in Cyrtophora citricola Forskål (Araneae: Araneidae) in West Africa. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 5:291–300

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rypstra AL (1983) The importance of food and space in limiting web-spiders densities; a test using field enclosures. Oecologia 59:312–316

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Shen S-F, Reeve HK, Herrnkind W (2010) The brave leader game and the timing of altruism among nonkin. Am Nat 176:242–248

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Sherman PW, Lacey EA, Reeve HK, Keller L (1995) Forum: the eusociality continuum. Behav Ecol 6:102–108

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Uetz GW (1989) The “ricochet effect” and prey capture in colonial spiders. Oecologia 81:154–159

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Uetz GW (1996) Risk sensitivity and the paradox of colonial web-building in spiders. Am Zool 36:459–470

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Uetz GW, Cangialosi KR (1986) Genetic differences in social behavior and spacing in populations of Metepeira spinipes, a communal-territorial orb weaver (Araneae, Araneidae). J Arachnol 14:159–173

    Google Scholar 

  • Uetz GW, Hieber CS (1997) Colonial web-building spiders: balancing costs and benefits of group-living. In: Choe J, Crespi B (eds) The evolution of social behavior in insects and arachnids. Cambridge University Press, New York, pp 458–475

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Uetz GW, Kane TC, Stratton GE (1982) Variation in the social grouping tendency of a communal web-building spider. Science 217:547–549

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Ventura L (2016) The effect of colony density on fitness and dispersal in the colonial spider Cyrtophora citricola. M.Sc. thesis, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Beer Sheva, Israel

  • Whitehouse MEA, Lubin Y (2005) The functions of societies and the evolution of group living: spider societies as a test case. Biol Rev 80:347–361

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Windfinder.com. (2015) Online at www.windfinder.com/windstatistics/tel_aviv_ben_gurion. Accessed 6 December 2015

  • Yip EC, Lubin Y (2016) Effects of diet restriction on life history in a sexually cannibalistic spider. Biol J Linn Soc 118:410–420

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yip EC, Rayor LS (2014) Maternal care and subsocial behavior in spiders. Biol Rev 89:427–449

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank Iris Musli and all members of the Lubin lab for maintaining prey populations and spider diets. We also thank Ishai Hoffman for net house maintenance. We thank Dr. Elizabeth Jakob and two anonymous reviewers for their helpful comments on the manuscript. Funding to ECY was provided by the Jacob Blaustein Center for Scientific Cooperation and the Kreitman School for Advanced Graduate Studies. We thank the Parks Authority for permission to collect in the Bessor Reserve (permit #40719). The study was funded by the U.S.-Israel Binational Science Foundation, grant #2010178. This is publication no. 943 of the Mitrani Department of Desert Ecology.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Eric C. Yip.

Ethics declarations

Data availability

All data generated or analyzed during this study are included in this published article and its supplementary information files.

Additional information

Communicated by J. Pruitt

Electronic supplementary material

ESM 1

(XLSX 49 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Yip, E.C., Levy, T. & Lubin, Y. Bad neighbors: hunger and dominance drive spacing and position in an orb-weaving spider colony. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 71, 128 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00265-017-2357-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00265-017-2357-6

Keywords

Navigation