Cooperative prey capture by young subsocial spiders

Matriphagous young of a subsocial spider Amaurobius ferox exhibit collective predation during their post-maternal social period. In this paper, we examine functional mechanisms of collective predation by sibling groups. Predation efficiency increased with increasing number of individuals within each group. Solitary or paired individuals were generally unable to capture a 20 mg cricket. In larger groups, more individuals participated and captured the prey more quickly. Some siblings did not take part in paralyzing prey, but later consumed it. The proportion of these profiteers within a group increased with the group size. Presented with prey of different sizes (1, 5, or 40 mg), siblings were most aggressive towards each other when predating on 5 mg prey. Prey of this size could be captured by a single individual and yet were sufficiently large for more than one individual to eat. Siblings were much less aggressive towards one another during the capture of 40 mg prey, which require the assistance of other individuals to capture. By providing the same mass of prey in different numbers of individuals (a single cricket of 40 or 40 mg of first-instar crickets), we tested the influence of cooperation on the post-maternal social period. We found no difference in the development of young during the social period nor the timing of dispersal and the body mass of dispersing individuals. We conclude that the young of this subsocial animal increased predation efficiency by cooperative hunting after the mother's death.

[1]  K. Kim,et al.  Cooperative prey capture by young subsocial spiders: II. Behavioral mechanism , 2005, Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology.

[2]  P. Ward,et al.  Conflict and Cooperation in the Group Feeding of the Social Spider Stegodyphus Mimosarum , 1985 .

[3]  A. Decae.  Dispersal: Ballooning and Other Mechanisms , 1987 .

[4]  B. Krafft,et al.  Influence of Food Supply on the Duration of the Gregarious Phase of a Maternal-Social Spider, Coelotes Terrestris (Araneae, Agelenidae) , 1986 .

[5]  J. Schneider.  Survival and growth in groups of a subsocial spider (Stegodyphus lineatus) , 1995, Insectes Sociaux.

[6]  C. Plateaux-Quènu,et al.  A reflection on social evolution in two different groups of arthropods: halictine bees (Hymenoptera) and spiders (Arachnida) , 1997 .

[7]  Charles D. Michener,et al.  Comparative Social Behavior of Bees , 1969 .

[8]  K. W. Kim,et al.  Dispersal behaviour in a subsocial spider: group conflict and the effect of food availability , 2000, Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology.

[9]  J. Cloudsley-Thompson.  XCIII.—The life-histories of the British cribellate spiders of the genus Ciniflo bl. (Dictynidae) , 1955 .

[10]  Factors influencing the evolution of social behaviour in Australian crab spiders (Araneae: Thomisidae) , 1998 .

[11]  T. Caraco,et al.  Social Foraging Theory , 2018 .

[12]  Bernard J. Crespi,et al.  The Evolution of Social Behavior in Insects and Arachnids: Acknowledgements , 1997 .

[13]  Y. Lubin,et al.  Competitive foraging in the social spider Stegodyphus dumicola , 1999, Animal Behaviour.

[14]  L. Dugatkin.  Cooperation Among Animals: An Evolutionary Perspective , 1997 .

[15]  K. Kim,et al.  Functional Value of Matriphagy in the Spider Amaurobius ferox , 2000 .

[16]  W. Shear,et al.  Spiders : webs, behavior, and evolution , 1986 .

[17]  E. Sirot.  An evolutionarily stable strategy for aggressiveness in feeding groups , 2000 .

[18]  E. Kullmann.  Evolution of Social Behavior in Spiders (Araneae; Eresidae and Theridiidae) , 1972 .

[19]  B. Crespi,et al.  The Evolution of Social Behavior in Insects and Arachnids: Explanation and evolution of social systems , 1997 .

[20]  J. Schneider,et al.  Reproductive state and care giving in Stegodyphus (Araneae: Eresidae) and the implications for the evolution of sociality , 2002, Animal Behaviour.

[21]  B. Opell.  The ability of spider cribellar prey capture thread to hold insects with different surface features , 1994 .

[22]  W. Nentwig.  Ecophysiology of Spiders , 1987, Springer Berlin Heidelberg.

[23]  K. Kim,et al.  Trophic egg laying in the spider, Amaurobius ferox: mother–offspring interactions and functional value , 2000, Behavioural Processes.

[24]  K. Bowden.  The evolution of sociality in the spitting spider, Scytodes fusca (Araneae: Scytodidae)—evidence from observations of intraspecific interactions , 1991 .

[25]  L. Ruttan.  Experimental manipulations of dispersal in the subsocial spider, Theridion pictum , 1990, Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology.

[26]  B. Krafft,et al.  Experimental manipulations of social tendencies in the subsocial spiderCoelotes terrestris , 1993, Insectes Sociaux.

[27]  W. Nentwig.  Social spiders catch larger prey: a study of Anelosimus eximius (Araneae: Theridiidae) , 1985, Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology.

[28]  Leticia Avilés,et al.  Cooperation and non-linear dynamics: An ecological perspective on the evolution of sociality , 1999 .

[29]  D. Blumstein,et al.  Social trajectories and the evolution of social behavior , 2002 .

[30]  Craig Packer,et al.  The Evolution of Cooperative Hunting , 1988, The American Naturalist.

[31]  Predatory behavior of the social spiderMallos gregalis: Is it cooperative? , 1979, Insectes Sociaux.

[32]  K. Kim.  Social Facilitation of Synchronized Molting Behavior in the Spider Amaurobius ferox (Araneae, Amaurobiidae) , 2001, Journal of Insect Behavior.