Skip to main content
Log in

Species recognition and species isolation in wandering spiders (Cupiennius spp.; Ctenidae)

  • Published:
Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Summary

One of the roles ascribed to spider courtship is that of mate recognition and reproductive isolation. We describe behavioral mechanisms underlying these functions in three species of wandering spiders of the genus Cupiennius (Ctenidae). C. salei and the two sympatric species C. getazi and C. coccineus discriminate conspecifics and heterospecifics in a multistage process which covers three principal phases of courtship: (1) Chemical phase: male spiders initiate vibratory courtship communication less often upon contact with heterospecific than with conspecific female silk. (2) Vibratory phase: females respond with their own vibration less often and with increased delay to the vibratory courtship signals of heterospecific males than to those of conspecific males. (3) Tactile phase: in heterospecific pairings males and females interrupt the contact phase if their courtship has progressed thus far. The product of the probabilities of passing through each of the different stages of courtship is between 0.44 and 0.88 for conspecific pairings, but zero for most heterospecific pairings. This is to a greater extent due to the behavioral barriers of the vibratory and the tactile phase than to that of the chemical phase. Male taxis on tracks of female silk does not depend on the species-specificity of the silk. Female vibrations are not essential for species recognition: males increase their signal rates, orient toward and approach responding females in both con- and heterospecific pairings. Female attacks on males are similar to attacks on prey; males defend themselves with outstretched front legs and are caught and killed by the female in only 5% of the cases. In all phases of courtship, female C. salei are least and female C. getazi most selective. When female C. coccineus and C. getazi are involved in heterospecific pairings no copulation is attempted. In contrast, 13 copulations of C. salei with males of the other two species were observed; egg sacs never resulted from these copulations. Among males, those of C. getazi were least selective. The likelihood of heterospecific pairs passing through all phases of courtship is higher in case of the allopatric than in that of the sympatric species. This finding applies to the courtship as a whole, but not necessarily to each of its phases.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Barth FG (1985) Neuroethology of the spider vibration sense. In: Barth FG (ed) Neurobiology of arachnids. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York, pp 203–229

    Google Scholar 

  • Barth FG (1989) Sensory guidance in spider pre-copulatory behaviour. In: Barnes WJP (ed) Sensory guidance in invertebrate behaviour. Manchester University Press, Manchester (in press)

    Google Scholar 

  • Barth FG, Schmitt A (1989) Diversity of signal functions in spider courtship behavior. In: Elsner N, Singer W (eds) Dynamics and plasticity in neuronal systems. Proceedings of 17th Göttingen Neurobiology Conference. Thieme, Stuttgart, p 139

    Google Scholar 

  • Barth FG, Seyfarth E-A, Bleckmann H, Schüch W (1988) Spiders of the genus Cupiennius Simon 1891 (Araneae, Ctenidae). I. Range distribution, dwelling plants, and climatic characteristics of the habitats. Oecologia 77:187–193

    Google Scholar 

  • Bush GL (1975) Modes of animal speciation. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 6:339–364

    Google Scholar 

  • Carson HL (1978) Speciation and sexual selection in Hawaiian Drosophila. In: Brussard PF (ed) Ecological genetics: the interface. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York, pp 93–119

    Google Scholar 

  • Clauß G, Ebner H (1979) Grundlagen der Statistik. Harri Deutsch, Thun Frankfurt/Main

    Google Scholar 

  • Eberhard WG (1985) Sexual selection and animal genitalia. Harvard University Press, Cambridge MA

    Google Scholar 

  • Futuyma DJ (1986) Evolutionary biology. Sinauer, Sunderland MA

    Google Scholar 

  • Futuyma DJ, Mayer GC (1980) Non-allopatric speciation in animals. Syst Zool 29:254–271

    Google Scholar 

  • Gerhardt HC, Davis MS (1988) Variation in the coding of species identity in the advertisement calls of Litoria uerreauxi (Anura: Hylidae). Evolution 42:556–565

    Google Scholar 

  • Grant V (1989) The theory of speciational trends. Am Nat 133:604–612

    Google Scholar 

  • Häuser CL (1987) The debate about the biological species concept — a review. Z Zool Syst Evol Forsch 25:241–257

    Google Scholar 

  • Jackson RR (1986) Interspecific interactions of communal jumping spiders (Araneae, Salticidae) from Kenya: mechanisms of sex-and species-recognition. Behaviour 97:297–307

    Google Scholar 

  • Jackson RR (1987) Comparative study of releaser pheromones associated with the silk of jumping spiders (Araneae, Salticidae). NZJ Zool 14:1–10

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaneshiro KY (1980) Sexual isolation, speciation and the direction of evolution. Evolution 34:437–444

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaneshiro KY, Boake CRB (1987) Sexual selection and speciation: issues raised by Hawaiian Drosophila. Trends Ecol Evol 2:207–211

    Google Scholar 

  • Lachmuth U, Grasshoff M, Barth FG (1984) Taxonomische Revision der Gattung Cupiennius Simon 1891 (Arachnida: Araneae). Senckenberg Biol 65:329–372

    Google Scholar 

  • Markl H (1985) Manipulation, modulation, information, cognition: some of the riddles of communication. In: Hölldobler B, Lindauer M (eds) Experimental behavioral ecology and sociobiology. Fortschr Zool 31:163–194

  • Mayr E (1963) Animal species and evolution. Harvard University Press, Cambridge MA

    Google Scholar 

  • Peaslee AG, Wilson G (1989) Spectral sensitivity in jumping spiders (Araneae, Salticidae). J Comp Physiol (Sect A) 164:359–363

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosenthal RR, Rosnow RL (1984) Essentials of behavioral research. Methods and data analysis. McGraw Hill, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Rovner JS, Barth FG (1981) Vibratory communication through living plants by a tropical wandering spider. Science 214:464–466

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmitt A, Schuster M, Barth FG (1990) Daily locomotor activity patterns in three species of Cupiennius (Araneae, Ctenidae): the males are the wandering spiders. J Arachnol 18:249–255

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmitt A, Schuster M, Barth FG (1991) Male competition in a wandering Spider (Cupiennius getazi). Ethology (submitted)

  • Schuch W, Barth FG (1985) Temporal patterns in the vibratory courtship of a wandering spider (Cupiennius salei Keys). Behav Ecol Sociobiol 16:263–271

    Google Scholar 

  • Schuch W, Barth FG (1990) Vibratory communication in a spider: female responses to synthetic male vibrations. J Comp Physiol (Sect A) 166:817–826

    Google Scholar 

  • Siegel SS (1956) Nonparametric statistics for the behavioral sciences. McGraw Hill, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Spieth HT, Ringo JM (1983) Mating behaviour and sexual isolation in Drosophila. In: Ashburner M, Carson HL, Thompson JN (eds) The genetics and biology of Drosophila. Academic Press, New York, pp 223–284

    Google Scholar 

  • Stratton GE, Uetz GW (1986) The inheritance of courtship behavior and its role as a reproductive isolating mechanism in two species of Schizocosa wolf spiders (Araneae: Lycosidae). Evolution 40:129–141

    Google Scholar 

  • Uetz GW, Stratton GE (1982) Acoustic communication and reproductive isolation in spiders. In: Witt PN, Rovner JS (eds) Spider communication. Mechanisms and ecological significance. Princeton University Press, Princeton NJ

    Google Scholar 

  • Verrell PA (1989) An experimental study of the behavioral basis of sexual isolation between two sympatric plethodontid salamanders, Desmognathus imitator and D. ochrophaeus. Ethology 80:274–282

    Google Scholar 

  • Verrell PA, Arnold SJ (1989) Behavioral observations of sexual isolation among allopatric populations of the mountain dusky salamander, Desmognathus ochrophaeus. Evolution 43:745–755

    Google Scholar 

  • Vrba ES (1985) Introductory comments on species and speciation. In: Vrba ES (ed) Species and speciation. Transvaal Museum, Pretoria, pp ix-xviii (Transv Mus Monogr 4)

  • Welbergen Ph, Van Dijken FR, Scharloo W (1987) Collation of the courtship behaviour of the sympatric species Drosophila melanogaster and D. simulans. Behaviour 101:253–273

    Google Scholar 

  • West-Eberhard MJ (1983) Sexual selection, social competition, and speciation. Q Rev Biol 58:155–183

    Google Scholar 

  • West-Eberhard MJ (1984) Sexual selection, competitive communication and species-specific signals in insects. In: Lewis T (ed) Insect communication. 12th Symposia of the Royal Entomological Society of London, pp 283–323

  • White MJD (1978) Modes of speciation. Freeman, San Francisco

    Google Scholar 

  • Yamashita S (1985) Photoreceptor cells in the spider eye: spectral sensitivity and efferent control. In: Barth FG (ed) Neurobiology of arachnids. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York, pp 103–117

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Additional information

Offprint requests to: F.G. Barth

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Barth, F.G., Schmitt, A. Species recognition and species isolation in wandering spiders (Cupiennius spp.; Ctenidae). Behav Ecol Sociobiol 29, 333–339 (1991). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00165957

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00165957

Keywords

Navigation