Advertisement

Springer Nature is making Coronavirus research free. View research | View latest news | Sign up for updates

Predator hunting mode influences patterns of prey use from grazing and epigeic food webs

  • 672 Accesses

  • 16 Citations

Abstract

Multichannel omnivory by generalist predators, especially the use of both grazing and epigeic prey, has the potential to increase predator abundance and decrease herbivore populations. However, predator use of the epigeic web (soil surface detritus/microbe/algae consumers) varies considerably for reasons that are poorly understood. We therefore used a stable isotope approach to determine whether prey availability and predator hunting style (active hunting vs. passive web-building) impacted the degree of multichannel omnivory by the two most abundant predators on an intertidal salt marsh, both spiders. We found that carbon isotopic values of herbivores remained constant during the growing season, while values for epigeic feeders became dramatically more enriched such that values for the two webs converged in August. Carbon isotopic values for both spider species remained midway between the two webs as values for epigeic feeders shifted, indicating substantial use of prey from both food webs by both spider species. As the season progressed, prey abundance in the grazing food web increased while prey abundance in the epigeic web remained constant or declined. In response, prey consumption by the web-building spider shifted toward the grazing web to a much greater extent than did consumption by the hunting spider, possibly because passive web-capture is more responsive to changes in prey availability. Although both generalist predator species engaged in multichannel omnivory, hunting mode influenced the extent to which these predators used prey from the grazing and epigeic food webs, and could thereby influence the strength of trophic cascades in both food webs.

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

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

References

  1. Agnew AM, Shull DH, Buchsbaum R (2003) Growth of a salt marsh invertebrate on several species of marsh grass detritus. Biol Bull 205:238–239

  2. Anderson WB, Polis GA (2004) Allochthonous nutrient and food inputs: consequences for temporal stability. In: Polis GA, Power ME, Huxel GR (eds) Food webs at the landscape level. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, pp 82–95

  3. Bell JR et al (2008) Beneficial links for the control of aphids: the effects of compost applications on predators and prey. J Appl Ecol 45:1266–1273

  4. Birkhofer K, Wise DH, Scheu S (2008) Subsidy from the detrital food web, but not microhabitat complexity, affects the role of generalist predators in an aboveground herbivore food web. Oikos 117:494–500

  5. Blum JL (1968) Salt marsh Spartinas and associated algae. Ecol Monogr 38:199–221

  6. Chen B, Wise DH (1999) Bottom-up limitation of predaceous arthropods in a detritus-based terrestrial food web. Ecology 80:761–772

  7. Currin CA, Newell SY, Paerl HW (1995) The role of standing dead Spartina alterniflora and benthic microalgae in salt marsh food webs: considerations based on multiple stable isotope analysis. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 121:99–116

  8. DeNiro MJ, Epstein S (1981) Influence of diet on the distribution of nitrogen isotopes in animals. Geochim Cosmochim Acta 45:341–351

  9. Denno RF (1976) Ecological significance of wing-polymorphism in Fulgoroidea which inhabit tidal salt marshes. Ecol Entomol 1:257–266

  10. Denno RF (1977) Comparison of the assemblages of sap-feeding insects (Homoptera–Hemiptera) inhabiting two structurally different salt marsh grasses in the genus Spartina. Environ Entomol 6:359–371

  11. Denno RF (1980) Ecotope differentiation in a guild of sap-feeding insects on the salt marsh grass, Spartina patens. Ecology 61:702–714

  12. Denno RF et al (2000) Feeding-induced changes in plant quality mediate interspecific competition between sap-feeding herbivores. Ecology 81:1814–1827

  13. Denno RF, Gratton C, Peterson MA, Langellotto GA, Finke DL, Huberty AF (2002) Bottom-up forces mediate natural-enemy impact in a phytophagous insect community. Ecology 83:1443–1458

  14. Denno RF, Mitter MS, Langellotto GA, Gratton C, Finke DL (2004) Interactions between a hunting spider and a web-builder: consequences of intraguild predation and cannibalism for prey suppression. Ecol Entomol 29:566–577

  15. Denno RF, Lewis D, Gratton C (2005) Spatial variation in the relative strength of top-down and bottom-up forces: causes and consequences for phytophagous insect populations. Ann Zool Fenn 42:295–311

  16. Döbel HG, Denno RF (1994) Predator–planthopper interactions. In: Denno RF, Perfect TJ (eds) Planthoppers: their ecology and management. Chapman & Hall, New York, pp 325–399

  17. Döbel HG, Denno RF, Coddington JA (1990) Spider (Aranae) community structure in an intertidal salt marsh: effects of vegetation structure and tidal flooding. Environ Entomol 19:1356–1370

  18. Finke DL, Denno RF (2006) Spatial refuge from intraguild predation: implications for prey suppression and trophic cascades. Oecologia 149:265–275

  19. Fry B (2006) Stable isotope ecology. Springer, New York

  20. Galvan K, Fleeger JW, Fry B (2008) Stable isotope addition reveals dietary importance of phytoplankton and microphytobenthos to saltmarsh infauna. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 359:37–49

  21. Gratton C, Denno RF (2003) Seasonal shift from bottom-up to top-down impact in phytophagous insect populations. Oecologia 134:487–495

  22. Greenstone MH (1979) Spider feeding behaviour optimises dietary essential amino acid composition. Nature 282:501–503

  23. Halaj J, Wise DH (2002) Impact of a detrital subsidy on trophic cascades in a terrestrial grazing food web. Ecology 83:3141–3151

  24. Halaj J, Peck RW, Niwa CG (2005) Trophic structure of a macroarthropod litter food web in managed coniferous forest stands: a stable isotope analysis with δ15N and δ13C. Pedobiologia 49:109–118

  25. Harwood JD, Sunderland KD, Symondson WOC (2003) Web-location by linyphiid spiders: prey-specified aggregation and foraging strategies. J Anim Ecol 72:745–756

  26. Kuusk A-K, Ekbom B (2010) Lycosid spiders and alternative food: feeding behavior and implications for biological control. Biol Control 55:20–26

  27. Leroux SJ, Loreau M (2010) Consumer-mediated recycling and cascading trophic interactions. Ecology 91:2162–2171

  28. Lewis D, Denno RF (2009) A seasonal shift in habitat suitability enhances an annual predator subsidy. J Anim Ecol 78:752–760

  29. Lopez GR, Levinton JS, Slobodkin LB (1977) The effect of grazing by the detritivore Orchestia grillus on Spartina litter and its associated microbial community. Oecologia 30:111–127

  30. McCann K, Hastings A, Huxel GR (1998) Weak trophic interactions and the balance of nature. Nature 395:794–798

  31. McCann KS, Rasmussen JB, Umbanhowar J (2005) The dynamics of spatially coupled food webs. Ecol Lett 8:513–523

  32. McNabb DM, Halaj J, Wise DH (2001) Inferring trophic positions of generalist predators and their linkage to the detrital food web in agroecosystems: a stable isotope analysis. Pedobiologia 45:289–297

  33. Miyashita T, Takada M (2007) Habitat provisioning for aboveground predators decreases detritivores. Ecology 88:2803–2809

  34. Miyashita T, Takada M, Shimazaki A (2003) Experimental evidence that aboveground predators are sustained by underground detritivores. Oikos 103:31–36

  35. Oelbermann K, Scheu S (2009) Control of aphids on wheat by generalist predators: effects of predator density and the presence of alternative prey. Entomol Exp Appl 132:225–231

  36. Olive CW (1982) Behavioral response of a sit-and-wait predator to spatial variation in foraging gain. Ecology 63:912–920

  37. Pace ML, Cole JJ, Carpenter SR, Kitchell JF (1999) Trophic cascades revealed in diverse ecosystems. Trends Ecol Evol 14:483–488

  38. Persons MH, Uetz GW (1998) Presampling sensory information and prey density assessment by wolf spiders (Araneae, Lycosidae). Behav Ecol 9:360–366

  39. Peterson BJ, Fry B (1987) Stable isotopes in ecosystem studies. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 18:293–320

  40. Phillips DL, Gregg JW (2001) Uncertainty in source partitioning using stable isotoped. Oecologia 127:171–179

  41. Phillips DL, Newsome SD, Gregg JW (2005) Combining sources in stable isotope mixing models: alternative methods. Oecologia 144:520–527

  42. Pickney J, Zingmark RG (1993) Biomass and production of benthic microalgal communities in estuarine habitats. Estuaries 16:887–897

  43. Polis GA, Hurd SD (1996) Allochthonous input across habitats, subsidized consumers, and apparent trophic cascades: examples from the ocean–land interface. In: Polis GA, Winemiller KO (eds) Food webs: integration of patterns and dynamics. Chapman & Hall, New York, pp 275–285

  44. Polis GA, Strong DR (1996) Food web complexity and community dynamics. Am Nat 147:813–846

  45. Post DM (2002) Using stable isotopes to estimate trophic position: models, methods, and assumptions. Ecology 83:703–718

  46. Quinones-Rivera ZJ, Fleeger JW (2005) The grazing effects of grass shrimp, Palaemonetes pugio, on epiphytic microalgae associated with Spartina alterniflora. Estuaries 28:274–285

  47. Raupp MJ, Denno RF (1979) The influence of patch size on a guild of sap-feeding insects that inhabit the salt marsh grass Spartina patens. Environ Entomol 8:412–417

  48. Redfield AC (1972) Development of a New England salt marsh. Ecol Monogr 42:201–237

  49. Schmitz OJ (2007) Predator diversity and trophic interactions. Ecology 88:2415–2426

  50. Settle WH et al (1996) Managing tropical rice pests through conservation of generalist natural enemies and alternative prey. Ecology 77:1975–1988

  51. Shimazaki A, Miyashita T (2005) Variable dependence on detrital and grazing food webs by generalist predators: aerial insects and web spiders. Ecography 28:485–494

  52. Sih A, Englund G, Wooster D (1998) Emergent impacts of multiple predators on prey. Trends Ecol Evol 13:350–355

  53. Sullivan MJ, Currin CA (2000) Community structure and functional dynamics of benthic microalgae in salt marshes. In: Weinstein MP, Kreeger DA (eds) Concepts and controversies in tidal marsh ecology. Kluwer, Dordrecht, pp 81–106

  54. Sullivan MJ, Moncreiff CA (1988) Primary production of edaphic algal communities in a Mississippi salt marsh. J Phycol 24:49–58

  55. Symondson WOC, Sunderland KD, Greenstone MH (2002) Can generalist predators be effective biocontrol agents? Annu Rev Entomol 47:561–594

  56. Vince SW, Valiela I (1981) An experimental study of the structure of herbivorous insect communities in a salt marsh. Ecology 62:1662–1678

  57. von Berg K, Thies C, Tscharntke T, Scheu S (2010) Changes in herbivore control in arable fields by detrital subsidies depend on predator species and vary in space. Oecologia 163:1033–1042

  58. Walter DE, Proctor HC (1999) Mites: ecology, evolution and behaviour, 1st edn. Everbest, Hong Kong

  59. Wise DH, Snyder WE, Tuntibunpakul P, Halaj J (1999) Spiders in decomposition food webs of agroecosystems: theory and practice. J Arachnol 27:363–370

  60. Wise DH, Moldenhauer DM, Halaj J (2006) Using stable isotopes to reveal shifts in prey consumption by generalist predators. Ecol Appl 16:865–876

  61. Woodcock BA, Heard MS (2011) Disentangling the effects of predator hunting mode and habitat domain on the top-down control of insect herbivores. J Anim Ecol 80:495–503

  62. Zimmer M, Pennings SC, Buck TL, Carefoot TH (2004) Marsh litter and detritivores: a closer look at redundancy. Estuaries 27:753–769

Download references

Acknowledgments

We wish to thank members of the DC PIG (a plant–insect discussion group composed of members from DC-area universities and institutions), Sven Bacher, Dan Gruner, John Lill, Eric Lind, Martha Weiss, David Wise, and one anonymous reviewer for comments that improved this manuscript. Ken Able at the Rutgers University Marine Station facilitated our research at the Tuckerton field site. This research was supported in part by National Science Foundation Grants DEB-0313903 and an REU supplement awarded to R.F.D. S.M.M. was funded by the National Parks Ecological Research Fellowship Program, a partnership between the National Park Service, the Ecological Society of America and the National Park Foundation. It is funded by a generous grant from the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation.

Author information

Correspondence to Gina M. Wimp.

Additional information

Robert F. Denno: Deceased.

Communicated by Sven Bacher.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary material (DOC 470 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Wimp, G.M., Murphy, S.M., Lewis, D. et al. Predator hunting mode influences patterns of prey use from grazing and epigeic food webs. Oecologia 171, 505–515 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00442-012-2435-4

Download citation

Keywords

  • Multichannel omnivory
  • Detritus
  • Predation
  • Stable isotopes
  • Trophic interactions