Predators are traditionally classified as generalists and specialists based on the presence of adaptations that increase efficiency of prey capture and consumption and selection of particular prey types. Nevertheless, empirical evidence comparing foraging efficiency between generalist and specialist carnivores is scarce. We compared the prey-capture and feeding efficiency in a generalist and a specialist (araneophagous) spider predator. By using two related species, the generalist Harpactea rubicunda (Dysderidae) and the specialist Nops cf. variabilis (Caponiidae), we evaluated their fundamental trophic niche by studying the acceptance of different prey. Then, we compared their predatory behavior, efficiency in capturing prey of varying sizes, feeding efficiency, and nutrient extraction. Nops accepted only spiders as prey, while Harpactea accepted all offered prey, confirming that Nops is stenophagous, while Harpactea is euryphagous. Further, Nops displayed more specialized (stereotyped) capture behavior than Harpactea, suggesting that Nops is a specialist, while Harpactea is a generalist. The specialist immobilized prey faster, overcame much larger prey, and gained more mass (due to feeding on larger prey) than the generalist. Both the specialist and the generalist spider extracted more proteins than lipids, but the extraction of macronutrients in the specialist was achieved mainly by consuming the prosoma of the focal prey. We show that the specialist has more efficient foraging strategy than the generalist.

Department of Botany and Zoology Faculty of Science Masaryk University Kotlářská 2 611 37 Brno Czech Republic

Grupo Multidisciplinario en Ecología para la Agricultura Centro Universitario Regional Este Universidad de la República Treinta y Tres Uruguay

Laboratorio de Ecología del Comportamiento Instituto de Investigaciones Biológicas Clemente Estable Montevideo Uruguay

Sección Entomología Facultad de Ciencias Universidad de la República Montevideo Uruguay

Zobrazit více v PubMed

Theor Popul Biol. 1980 Apr;17(2):201-14 PubMed

Biol Rev Camb Philos Soc. 2015 Aug;90(3):744-61 PubMed

Curr Biol. 2014 Mar 17;24(6):R220-1 PubMed

Naturwissenschaften. 2011 Jul;98(7):593-603 PubMed

PLoS One. 2011;6(6):e21710 PubMed

Bioessays. 2015 Jun;37(6):701-9 PubMed

J Exp Biol. 2006 Aug;209(Pt 16):3164-9 PubMed

J Insect Physiol. 2003 Dec;49(12):1161-71 PubMed

PLoS One. 2014 Jun 09;9(6):e99165 PubMed

Nat Methods. 2012 Jul;9(7):671-5 PubMed

Oecologia. 1987 Jun;72 (3):473-478 PubMed

Naturwissenschaften. 2014 Jul;101(7):533-40 PubMed

J Exp Biol. 2003 May;206(Pt 10):1669-81 PubMed

Toxicon. 2002 Jun;40(6):749-52 PubMed

Biol Rev Camb Philos Soc. 2013 Aug;88(3):550-63 PubMed

Toxins (Basel). 2016 Apr 18;8(4):114 PubMed

Sci Rep. 2015 Sep 11;5:14013 PubMed

Ecol Evol. 2017 Mar 21;7(8):2756-2766 PubMed

No ontogenetic shift in the realised trophic niche but in Batesian mimicry in an ant-eating spider

Prey and Venom Efficacy of Male and Female Wandering Spider, Phoneutria boliviensis (Araneae: Ctenidae)

Nest usurpation: a specialised hunting strategy used to overcome dangerous spider prey