Seothyra henscheli (Eresidae) is a burrowing spider that lives in the dune sea of the southern Namib Desert, Namibia. Prey capture by these spiders involves a foray from a cool subterranean retreat to the undersurface of a capture web that can be lethally hot. Striking, disentangling and retrieving
Prey capture by threePinguiculaspecies in a subarctic environment
✍ Scribed by P. S. Karlsson; L. M. Thorén; H. M. Hanslin
- Book ID
- 104720214
- Publisher
- Springer-Verlag
- Year
- 1994
- Tongue
- English
- Weight
- 596 KB
- Volume
- 99
- Category
- Article
- ISSN
- 0029-8549
No coin nor oath required. For personal study only.
✦ Synopsis
The number and biomass of prey captured were estimated for Pinguicula alpina, P. villosa and P. vulgaris in a subarctic environment. Seasonal captures were estimated for one site per species for 4-5 years. Captures were related to reproductive status (reproductive/non-reproductive) and to leaf area. For one species (P. vulgaris) the catch was also compared across a range of habitats. Of the seasonal catch, 50-75% was obtained during June and less than 5% during August. For P. alpina and P. villosa the seasonal catch varied threefold or more between years (means of 89-329 μg dry matter plant season for P. alpina, and 11-91 μg dry matter plant season for P. villosa), whereas the between-year variation for P. vulgaris was small (mean c. 600 μg plant season). Large variations were, however, observed among habitats for P. vulgaris. Captured prey may contribute a substantial amount of nutrients to the most successful individuals (up to 85% of the mean seasonal turnover), but prey capture varied greatly and during any given season many individuals obtained only marginal amounts of nutrients through carnivory. P. vulgaris trapped almost twice as much per unit leaf area and season as the other two species (224 for P. vulgaris versus 127 μg cm season for the other two species). Reproductive individuals of P. vulgaris trapped almost twice as much as non-reproductive individuals (after taking differences in leaf area into account). For the other two species no differences were observed between reproductive and non-reproductive individuals.
📜 SIMILAR VOLUMES