Cookies Policy

This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies.

I accept this policy

Find out more here

Predatory plasticity in nephilengys cruentata (araneae: tetragnathidae): relevance for phylogeny reconstruction

No metrics data to plot.
The attempt to load metrics for this article has failed.
The attempt to plot a graph for these metrics has failed.
The full text of this article is not currently available.

Brill’s MyBook program is exclusively available on BrillOnline Books and Journals. Students and scholars affiliated with an institution that has purchased a Brill E-Book on the BrillOnline platform automatically have access to the MyBook option for the title(s) acquired by the Library. Brill MyBook is a print-on-demand paperback copy which is sold at a favorably uniform low price.

Access this article

+ Tax (if applicable)
Add to Favorites
You must be logged in to use this functionality

image of Behaviour

The plasticity of behavioural expression has been used as an argument against the use of behavioural characters in the reconstruction of phylogenetic patterns. Nevertheless, plasticity itself may vary strongly among taxa, so that phylogenetic considerations about behavioural data must be complemented by an analysis of behavioural plasticity. Plasticity may also vary among distinct behavioural domains in a single species. We have studied the foraging repertoire in N. cruentata using a cluster analysis method, in order to identify the behavioural sequences employed by the spider when preying upon either distinct prey types or distinct prey sizes. Foraging behaviour varies less with prey size than with prey type. Variation in predatory sequences is obtained through (1) repetitions of one same sequence of categories, (2) the use of one same sequence at distinct phases of the predatory behaviour, or (3) the arrangement of behavioural categories in new sequences. Despite this plasticity in spider responses to prey, almost 40% of the predatory repertoire is common to both large and small prey items; this percentage lowers to 20% when we compare the predation of distinct prey types. These results suggest that phylogenetic analysis of predatory behaviour should focus on building ethograms for one single prey type. Small variations in prey/predator size among the predator species selected for a behavioural phylogenetic analysis are preferred to variations of prey type among predator taxa. We discuss the implications of this 'single prey-type' approach to the phylogenetic analysis of behaviour.


Full text loading...


Data & Media loading...

Article metrics loading...



Can't access your account?
  • Tools

  • Add to Favorites
  • Printable version
  • Email this page
  • Subscribe to ToC alert
  • Get permissions
  • Recommend to your library

    You must fill out fields marked with: *

    Librarian details
    Your details
    Why are you recommending this title?
    Select reason:
    Behaviour — Recommend this title to your library
  • Export citations
  • Key

  • Full access
  • Open Access
  • Partial/No accessInformation