25
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Spider Movement, UV Reflectance and Size, but Not Spider Crypsis, Affect the Response of Honeybees to Australian Crab Spiders

      research-article
      * ,
      PLoS ONE
      Public Library of Science

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          According to the crypsis hypothesis, the ability of female crab spiders to change body colour and match the colour of flowers has been selected because flower visitors are less likely to detect spiders that match the colour of the flowers used as hunting platform. However, recent findings suggest that spider crypsis plays a minor role in predator detection and some studies even showed that pollinators can become attracted to flowers harbouring Australian crab spider when the UV contrast between spider and flower increases. Here we studied the response of Apis mellifera honeybees to the presence of white or yellow Thomisus spectabilis Australian crab spiders sitting on Bidens alba inflorescences and also the response of honeybees to crab spiders that we made easily detectable painting blue their forelimbs or abdomen. To account for the visual systems of crab spider's prey, we measured the reflectance properties of the spiders and inflorescences used for the experiments. We found that honeybees did not respond to the degree of matching between spiders and inflorescences (either chromatic or achromatic contrast): they responded similarly to white and yellow spiders, to control and painted spiders. However spider UV reflection, spider size and spider movement determined honeybee behaviour: the probability that honeybees landed on spider-harbouring inflorescences was greatest when the spiders were large and had high UV reflectance or when spiders were small and reflected little UV, and honeybees were more likely to reject inflorescences if spiders moved as the bee approached the inflorescence. Our study suggests that only the large, but not the small Australian crab spiders deceive their preys by reflecting UV light, and highlights the importance of other cues that elicited an anti-predator response in honeybees.

          Related collections

          Most cited references10

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Evolution and ecology of spider coloration.

          Genetic color variation provides a tangible link between the external phenotype of an organism and its underlying genetic determination and thus furnishes a tractable system with which to explore fundamental evolutionary phenomena. Here we examine the basis of color variation in spiders and its evolutionary and ecological implications. Reversible color changes, resulting from several mechanisms, are surprisingly widespread in the group and must be distinguished from true genetic variation for color to be used as an evolutionary tool. Genetic polymorphism occurs in a large number of families and is frequently sex limited: Sex linkage has not yet been demonstrated, nor have the forces promoting sex limitation been elucidated. It is argued that the production of color is metabolically costly and is principally maintained by the action of sight-hunting predators. Key avenues for future research are suggested.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Speed-accuracy tradeoffs and false alarms in bee responses to cryptic predators.

            Learning plays a crucial role in predator avoidance [1-3], but little is known about how the type of experience with predators molds future prey behavior. Specifically, is predator-avoidance learning and memory retention disrupted by cryptic coloration of predators, such as crab spiders [4, 5]? How does experience with different predators affect foraging decisions? We evaluated these questions by exposing foraging bumblebees to controlled predation risk from predators (robotic crab spiders) that were either cryptic or highly contrasting, as assessed by a quantitative model of bee color perception [6]. Our results from 3D tracking software reveal a speed-accuracy tradeoff [7]: Bees slow their inspection flights after learning that there is a risk from cryptic spiders. The adjustment of inspection effort results in accurate predator detection, leveling out predation risk at the expense of foraging time. Overnight-retention tests reveal no decline in performance, but bees that had experienced cryptic predators are more prone to "false alarms" (rejection of foraging opportunities on safe flowers) than those that had experienced conspicuous predators. Therefore, bees in the cryptic-spider treatment made a functional decision to trade off reduced foraging efficiency via increased inspection times and false-alarm rates against higher potential fitness loss from being injured or eaten.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              Pollinator attraction: Crab-spiders manipulate flower signals.

                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Role: Editor
                Journal
                PLoS One
                plos
                plosone
                PLoS ONE
                Public Library of Science (San Francisco, USA )
                1932-6203
                2011
                16 February 2011
                : 6
                : 2
                : e17136
                Affiliations
                [1]Department of Functional and Evolutionary Ecology, Estación Experimental de Zonas Áridas (CSIC), Almeria, Spain
                University of Western Ontario, Canada
                Author notes

                Conceived and designed the experiments: ALL MARG. Performed the experiments: ALL MARG. Analyzed the data: ALL MARG. Contributed reagents/materials/analysis tools: ALL MARG. Wrote the paper: ALL MARG.

                Article
                PONE-D-10-04953
                10.1371/journal.pone.0017136
                3040225
                21359183
                916681dc-e8c5-4cae-9486-37ed210525bb
                Llandres, Rodríguez-Gironés. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
                History
                : 29 October 2010
                : 19 January 2011
                Page count
                Pages: 11
                Categories
                Research Article
                Biology
                Ecology
                Community Ecology
                Species Interactions
                Behavioral Ecology

                Uncategorized
                Uncategorized

                Comments

                Comment on this article