Cannibalism: Do risks of fighting and reprisal reduce predatory rates?
Cannibalism is a common phenomenon among insects. It has raised considerable interest both from a theoretical perspective and because of its importance in population dynamics in natural ecosystems. It could also play an important role from an applied perspective, especially when using predatory species in biological control programmes. The present paper aims to study the cannibalistic behaviour of Nabis pseudoferus Remane and the functional response of adult females. In a non-choice experiment, adult females showed clear acceptance of immature conspecifics as prey, with relatively high mortality values (51.89 ± 2.69%). These values were lower than those occurring for heterospecific prey, Spodoptera exigua Hübner, under the same conditions (80.00 ± 2.82%). However, the main result was that the rate of predation on heterospecific prey was reduced to 59.09 ± 7.08% in the presence of conspecific prey. The prey-capture behaviour of adult females differed when they hunted conspecific versus heterospecific prey. This was shown in the average handling time, which was 23.3 ± 3.3 min in the first case (conspecific) versus 16.6 ± 2.5 min in the second (heterospecific). Furthermore, the values increased in the former case and declined in the latter according to the order in which the prey were captured. The difference in handling time was not significant when adjusting the adult female functional response to conspecific nymphs. We argue that these results likely indicate risk aversion and a fear of reprisal among conspecifics.
KeywordsFunctional response Heterospecific and conspecific prey Insect Nabis pseudoferus Predatory behaviour Preypredator relationship Spodoptera exigua
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- Aleosfoor, M., N. Mortazavi and M. Poorkashkooli. 2014. Comparison cannibalistic behavior between two ladybirds, Coccinella septempunctata and Hippodamia variegata under laboratory experiments. Mun. Ent. Zool. 9: 645–650.Google Scholar
- Cabello, T., H. Rodriguez and P. Vargas. 1984. Development, longevity and fecundity of Sopodoptera littoralis (Lep.: Noctuidae) reared on eight artificial diets. J. Appl. Entomol. 97: 494–499.Google Scholar
- Canon, 2014. Communication Software for the Camera EOS Utility, Version 2.14. Canon Inc.Google Scholar
- Dixon, A.F.G. 2000. Insect Predator-Prey Dynamics: Ladybird Beetles and Biological Control. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
- Dong, Q. and G.A. Polis. 1992. The dynamics of cannibalistic populations: a foraging perspective. In: M.A. Elgar, M.A. and B.J. Crespi (eds.), Cannibalism: Ecology and Evolution among Diverse Taxa. Oxford University Press, Oxford. pp. 13–37.Google Scholar
- Elgar, M.A. and B.J. Crespi. 1992. Ecology and evolution of cannibalism. In: M. A. Elgar and B.J. Crespi (eds.), Cannibalism: Ecology and Evolution among Diverse Taxa. Oxford University Press, Oxford. pp. 1–12.Google Scholar
- Fathipour Y. and A.A.F. Jafari. 2003. Functional response of predators Nabis capsiformis and Chrysoperla carnea to different densities of Creontiades pallidus nymphs. J. Agric. Sci. Nat. Resour. 10: 125–133.Google Scholar
- Hagen, K.S., N.J. Mills, G. Gordh and J.A. McMurtry. 1999. Terrestrial arthropod predators of insect and mite pests. In: T.S. Bellows, T.W. Fisher, L.E. Caltagirone, D.L. Dahlsten, G. Gordh and C.B. Huffaker (eds.), Handbook of Biological Control: Principles and Applications of Biological Control. Academic Press, London. pp. 383–503.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Hurd, L.E. 2008. Predation: The role of generalist predators in biodiversity and biological control. In: J.L. Capinera (ed.), Encyclopedia of Entomology. Springer, Dordrecht, NL. pp. 3038–3042.Google Scholar
- IBM. 2012. IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, Version 21.0. IBM Corp. Armonk, NY.Google Scholar
- Jandel Scientific. 1994. Table Curve 2D User’s Manual. Version 2.0. Jandel Scientific. San Rafael, CA.Google Scholar
- Joyner, K. and F. Gould. 1987. Conspecific tissues and secretions as sources of nutrition. In: F. Slansky and J.G. Rodriguez (eds.), Nutritional Ecology of Insects, Mites, Spiders, and Related Invertebrates. Wiley, NY. pp 697–719.Google Scholar
- Juliano, S.A. 2001. Nonlinear curve fitting. Predation and functional response curves. In: S.M. Scheiner and J. Gurevitch (eds.), Design and Analysis of Ecological Experiments. Oxford University Press, Oxford. pp. 178–196.Google Scholar
- Mangeaud, A. and M. Videla. 2005. En busca de la independencia perdida: la utilización de modelos lineales generalizados mixtos en pruebas de preferencia. Ecol. Austral 15: 199–206.Google Scholar
- Mills, N.J. 1982. Voracity, cannibalism and coccinellid predation. Ann. Appl. Biol. 101: 144–148.Google Scholar
- Motulsky, H. and A. Christopoulos. 2003. Fitting Models to Biological Data Using Linear and Nonlinear Regression: A Practical Guide to Curve Fitting. GraphPad Software, Inc., San Diego, CA.Google Scholar
- Puchkov, A.V. 1980. Particulars of the biology of predacious Nabis spp. Zashch. Rast. 8: 44.Google Scholar
- Ricard, I. 2008. Statistical Methods for Insect Choice Experiments. PhD Dissertation. École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne, Lausanne, CH.Google Scholar
- Riechert, S.E. 1988. The energetic costs of fighting. Integr. Comp. Biol. 28: 877–884.Google Scholar
- Statgraphics. 2010. Statgraphics Centurion XVI User Manual. StatPoint Technologies, Inc., Warrenton, VA.Google Scholar
- Stasek, D.J. 2009. Population Responses of a Generalist Insect Predator and its Prey to Patch Characteristics in Forage Crops. PhD Dissertation. Faculty of Miami University, FL.Google Scholar
This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.